CHAPTER VII – Removing Remaining Objections
CHAPTER VII – Removing Remaining Objections The removal of other remaining objections.
The close of our treatise will be the removal of some typical sophisms and captious arguments of the Arminians, which of late have been made common and vulgar. This will wind up the whole controversy which has fervently drawn us thus far. I will labor to be as brief as possible in this, partly because these things have been handled at large by others; and partly
I do so because, having removed all hint of opposition to the truth as it is maintained from the Scriptures, all other objections will naturally sink of themselves. Yet, because great boastings and swelling words of vanity have been used concerning some of the objections that follow, it is necessary that something be said to show the emptiness of such flourishes, so that the weakest believer may not be entangled by them.
OBJECTION I. Each must believe Jesus died for him; ergo he died for all.
What we will begin with is an argument of as great fame and as little merit as any that has been used of late, and it is this:
Major Proposition - What everyone is bound to believe is true.
Minor Proposition - Everyone is bound to believe that Jesus Christ died for him.
Conclusion – Therefore it is true that Jesus Christ died for everyone.
This is an argument which the Arminians and their friends never use, thus revealing their conviction of the weakness of the rest of their arguments; that is, unless they add some notable tribute to it, along with some affronts and threats to their adversaries. Both sides agree that it is termed the "Remonstrants' Achilles". Now, truly, for my part, as I will not transcribe anything here out of the many full answers given to it by our divines, answers by which this Achilles, or rather Goliath, has often been cast to the ground. So I heartily wish that the many laborious and verbose answers, which the boasting of our adversaries has elicited for this poor nothing,
have not given it a repute a thousand times beyond what it warrants of itself, nor what its managers could have procured for it by themselves.
Assumptions of this Objection: first, "believing", both as to its obligation and the truth, means the same.
The term "believe" is used in the same sense in both propositions; otherwise the syllogism is false in its form; secondly, "believing" means Christ is savingly applied to the soul.
Believing is understood as a saving application of Christ to the soul, as held out in the promise, for believing that Christ died for me in particular, which is each person's duty to believe, can be nothing else but such a saving application; thirdly, "believing" refers to the purpose of the Father and the intent of Jesus.
Believing that Christ died for anyone, according to the business in question, must refer to the purpose of the Father and the intention of Jesus Christ himself; for that is what is opposed by us with regard to universality; fourthly, the condition of everyone for whom Christ died is the same
The term "everyone" must refer to all men as considered in a like condition; for several respects and conditions of the same persons may cause them to come under several obligations as to their duties: now, there is no one condition common to all except the state of wrath and death, Eph. 2:3; therefore every man must be considered to be in that condition; so, in sum, the sense of the minor proposition is,
Restatement of Proposition 2: "All men in the world, as considered in a state of wrath and unregeneracy, are bound to believe (and it was the intention of God) that Christ should die for every one of them in particular."
Minor Proposition: Everyone is bound to believe that Jesus Christ died for him.
Now, ignoring the major proposition (which is false), what men are bound to believe in this minor proposition is neither true nor false, but good. As
such, the proposition is absolutely false. It has not the least hint of reason or Scripture to support it; and when our adversaries prove that "everyone" means every individual in the world, I will engage myself to be their proselyte.
First, if it were so, then some must be bound to believe what is false.
This cannot be, for every obligation to believe is from the God of truth.
Now, it is false that Christ died for all and every individual of human kind, as proved before at large.
Secondly, men would be bound to believe what is not revealed.
And yet divine revelation is the object of all faith. The Scriptures do not show anywhere that Christ died for this or that particular man as such, but only for sinners indefinitely; ofttimes this is antecedently specified by God's purpose, and consequently by their own purchased obedience.
Thirdly, the objects of faith are God's commands, promises, and threats.
Neither God's purpose nor man's obedience is proposed as the object of faith of anyone, but only his commands, promises, and threats; anything else is left to be collected and assured to the soul by an experience actually enjoyed, and a sense of some sweet infallible result and effect of that experience in the heart.
Fourthly, any command to believe cannot be interpreted by God's intent.
Nor can any command in the Scripture to believe be interpreted by the purpose and intention of God, as though its meaning were, "God intended Christ to die for you in particular;" nor does any promise contain that sense.
Fifthly, unless he hears, how can anyone be bound to believe?
This of itself is enough to break the neck of this argument. All men do not have Christ's death proposed as an object of faith to them. How can they believe unless they hear? Can they be bound to believe what they never heard as the least rumor? How many millions of infants and others, in barbarous nations, go to their "own place" without hearing the least report of Jesus Christ, or his sufferings for them or others, even in these days of the gospel! How much more so before the coming of Christ in the flesh, when the means of grace were restricted to one small nation with a few proselytes! Are all those who remain, everyone, bound to
believe that Christ died for them, everyone in particular? Those who think so are doubtless bound to go and tell all of them – I mean those who are still in the land of the living. Unbelief is the great damming sin where faith is required (John 3:36).
358 And yet Paul proves that many will be condemned for sinning against the light of nature (Rom. 2:12).
This is an evident demonstration that faith is not required of all, and all men are not bound to believe.
But perhaps our adversaries will except, as they must except if they intend to have any trace or show of strength left to this argument, that they mean it only with regard to those who are called by the word, and so it is of force.
To this end it might be proposed this way:
"What everyone called by the word, those to whom the gospel is preached, is bound to believe, is true; everyone so called is bound to believe that Christ died for him in particular; ergo ," etc.
ANSWER: 1. Only the last foregoing exception is removed by this reformed argument; all the rest stand in their full force, which are sufficient to evert it. 2. Who does not see that this very reforming of the argument has made it completely useless to the cause in whose defense it was produced?
For if anyone, much less the great part of men, is excepted from this proposition, and not accounted for, then the general ransom falls to the ground. From the countless multiples of all, we come to the many that are called, and no doubt we will instantly descend to the few that are chosen.
As for the exception, that what is true with regard to those to whom it is proposed, I answer, First, the argument is taken from the scriptural obligation to believe, and it can be extended no further than it is actually extended there.
Secondly, it is not safe disputing what would be or should be, if things were not as God has appointed and ordained them. We see the will of God for the present; we are not to make our suppositions a basis for any argument to which they could otherwise have been disposed.
Thirdly, if the gospel were preached to all in the world, then all the mind and will of God that can in general be signified to them is this, "The one who believes and is baptized will be saved, but the one who does not believe will be damned." God has so concatenated and knit together faith and salvation that whoever will enjoy salvation must exercise faith. If the
gospel were now be preached to the Turks and the Indians, and they rejected it, they should certainly be damned for not believing what they were bound to believe upon the preaching of it.
Now, did Christ die for every one of them in particular? No, doubtless he did not. Rather this is the truth: "There is no other name under heaven given among men, by which we must be saved," but only by the name of Christ, made known to us in the gospel (Acts 4:12). What damns the soul is rejecting the counsel and wisdom of God to save sinners by the blood of Jesus. It is not believing the necessity of a Redeemer, and that Jesus of Nazareth was that Redeemer according to his own word to the Jews, "If you do not believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins," Indeed, the specific infidelity of the Jews was not believing him to be their Messiah, the one whom they saw declared to be the Son of God with power. Not believing these things is the soul-damning infidelity; it is obstinately refusing to come in upon the call of the gospel. But refusing to believe that Christ died for every one of them in particular is not what damned them. Indeed, that is something that could not, by the rule of the gospel, be proposed to them, and they never came so far as to question or esteem such a thing.
Still, then, we deny the minor proposition of the reduced syllogism; and we do so partly for the reasons stated, and partly for these reasons which are subjoined:
1. Those to whom the gospel is preached are bound to believe with that faith which is required for justification only. Now, this is not a full persuasion that Christ died for any one in particular, in the intention and purpose of God; for that does not reveal the object of justification, nor the way by which a sinner may be justified.
2. There is a natural order, established by God's appointment, in the things that are to be believed; so that until some of them are believed, the rest are not required (a man is not commanded or reasonably expected to skip all the lower rungs to get to the top of a ladder).
(1.) Repent and believe the gospel to be the word of God, and that it contains his will, and that Jesus Christ, revealed there, is the wisdom and power of God unto salvation.
(2.) There is an inseparable connection, by God's appointment, between faith and salvation; gospel faith carries a sinner quite out of himself and
off from his own righteousness.
(3.) There is a particular conviction, by the Spirit, of the necessity of a Redeemer, by which their souls in particular become weary, heavy laden, and burdened.
(4.) There is a serious full resting of the soul upon Christ, rolling onto him in the promise of the gospel that he is an all-sufficient Savior, able to deliver and save to the utmost those who come to God by him; that he is ready, able, and willing, though the preciousness of his blood and sufficiency of his ransom, to save every soul that will freely give themselves up to him for that end, and that he is resolved to be these to them. And in doing of all this, there is not one who is called upon by the gospel to inquire after the purpose and intention of God concerning the particular object of the death of Christ; rather, every one is fully assured that his death will be profitable to those who believe in him and obey him.
Now, fourthly, after all this and not before, it lies upon a believer to assure his soul of the good will and eternal love of God toward him in sending his
Son to die for him in particular, as he finds the fruit of the death of Christ in him and towards him. What a preposterous course it would be, and how opposite to the rule of the gospel, to call upon a man to believe that it was the intention and purpose of God that Christ should die for him in particular, and desire him to assure his soul of that, before he is convinced either, 1. Of the truth of the gospel in general; or,
2. That faith is the only way of salvation; or, 3. That he himself stands in need of a Savior; or,
4. That there is enough in Christ to save and recover him if he gives himself up to him in his own way!
Now, it is most apparent that only such persons as these are bound to believe what we have discoursed about. The argument, then, must once again be reformed, and it is proposed thus:
"What every one, convinced of the necessity of a Savior, and of the right way of salvation, hungering, thirsting, and panting after Jesus Christ, as alone able to give him refreshment, is bound to believe, is true; every such
person is bound to believe that Christ died for him in particular: ergo , it is true."
Some grant the whole of this without any prejudice to the cause we have undertaken to defend.
361 It is most apparent, then, 1. That all who are called by the word, in whatever state or condition they may continue, are not bound to believe that Christ died for them; but only those who are qualified as described above.
2. That believing with fiduciary confidence that Christ died for anyone in particular, is not proposed as a precept; nor is it obligatory to all who are called; nor is not believing it otherwise a sin, but has as its root a habit of unbelief, or not turning to God in Christ for mercy.
3. That no reprobate (for whom Christ did not die) will be condemned for not believing that Christ died for him in particular (which would not be true); but for not believing those things to which he was called, listed above, which are all most true in reference to him.
4. That the command to believe in Christ, which is specially urged as given to all (the point of contention), is not obligatory to anyone except upon fulfilling the conditions required for it.
5. To "believe on the name of Jesus Christ," which is the command in 1Jn.
3:23, is not to believe that it was the intention of God that Christ should die for us in particular, but to rest upon him for salvation, as in Isa. 1:11.
6. The testimony of God to which we ought to set our seal that it is true, is none other than this, "The one who has the Son has life, but the one who does not have the Son of God does not live," 1Jn. 5:12; reprobates, disbelieving this, do what lies in them to make God a liar, and are justly condemned for it. Whoever desires to see more of this argument may consult, if he wishes, Piscator, Perkins, Twisse, Synod of Dort, Du Moulin,
Baronius, Rutherford, Spanheim, Amesius, and others.
OBJECTION II. Particular redemption causes doubt whether one is saved.
"Any doctrine which fills the minds and souls of poor miserable sinners with doubts and misgivings whether they ought to believe or not, when
God calls them to it, cannot be agreeable to the gospel. But this is what the doctrine of particular redemption does. It fills the minds of sinners with misgivings and fears as to whether they should believe it or not; and that is because they are uncertain whether it was the intention of God that Christ died for them in particular or not, seeing that he supposedly did not die for all, but only for his elect. Thus when a soul is called upon to believe, he may justly begin to question whether it will be available for him to do so or not, and whether it is his duty or not, seeing that he does not know whether Christ died for him or not."
ANSWER:
1. Experience shows that misgivings, doubts, and fears will often arise in the hearts of sinners as the proper result of unconquered remaining unbelief; sometimes it is against, and sometimes it is to escape from, the truth of the gospel. The question is whether the doctrine itself caused the misgiving or stumbling of itself, in its own nature, to those who rightly perform their duty? Or are all those fears and misgivings the natural product and result of corruption and unbelief, setting themselves up against the truth as it is in Jesus? We deny the former, that the doctrine of particular effectual redemption is the cause; and the latter God alone can remedy.
2. This objection supposes that a man is bound to know and be persuaded (that is, believe) that Jesus Christ died for him in particular, by God's appointment, before he believes in Jesus Christ. No, this is what they make the bottom of their argument: that men of our persuasion may hesitate whether they ought to believe or not, because they are not assured beforehand that Christ died for them in particular by the designation and appointment of God. Now, if this is not an obvious contradiction, I do not know what is. For I ask you, what is it, according to Scripture, for man to be assured that Christ died for him in particular? Is it not the very highest improvement of faith? Does it not include a sense of the spiritual love of God shed abroad in our hearts? Is it not the top of the apostle's consolation in Rom. 8:34, 363 and the bottom of all his joyful assurance in Gal. 2:20?
They evidently require that a man must believe before he believes, so that he cannot believe, and he will exceedingly fear whether he ought to do so or not, unless he believes before he believes! I think such a removal of misgivings would be the ready way to entangle doubting consciences in further inextricable perplexities.
3. We deny that being persuaded it was the will of God that Christ died for him in particular either is or can be necessary in any way to draw a sinner to believe. Consider the following texts: sinners have a duty to believe the call of Christ, Matt. 11:28, 365 Isa. 55:1; 366 the command of God given in 1Jn.
3:23; 367 that promise of life upon the blood of Christ to save all believers in Acts 20:21, 368 Eph. 5:2; 369 the assured salvation of all believers without exception in Mark 16:16.
370 These and their like are enough to remove all doubts and fears, and are all that the Scripture holds out for that purpose.
4. That persuasion, (1.) Which asserts the certainty of salvation by the death of Christ to all believers; (2.) That affirms the command of God and the call of Christ to infallibly declare that duty which is required of the person commanded and called, which, if it is performed, will assuredly be acceptable to God;
(3.) That holds out purchased free grace to all distressed and burdened consciences; (4.) That reveals a fountain of blood, all-sufficient to purge all the sin of everyone in the world that will use the appointed means for coming to it;
That doctrine, I say, cannot possibly be the cause of any doubt or misgiving in the minds of convinced, burdened sinners, whether they ought to believe or not. Now, all this is presented by the doctrine of particular effectual redemption, in the dispensation of the gospel which is suitable to it.
I will, then, let this objection go without further pursuit, only attended with this query: "What is it, according to the authors of universal redemption, that men are bound to believe, when they know beforehand that Christ died for them in particular?" Is it a persuasion of the love of God and good will of Christ? It cannot be; they have that beforehand, John 3:16;
371 Rom. 5:8;
nor is it coming to God by Christ to enjoy the fruits of his death. For what is that, I ask? There are no fruits of the death of Christ, according to the universalists, except what are common to all –which might be damnation as easily as salvation, for more are damned than saved; which might be infidelity as well as faith, for most are unbelievers. The immediate fruits of the death of Christ can be nothing but what they hold in common with those
who perish. Plainly, their faith in Christ will at length appear to be Socinian obedience.
There are two things that remain, about which there is no small contention.
Both things, in themselves, are excelling and valuable; both are laid claim to by the several persuasions concerning the topic we address. But they are expressed with such an unequal plea, that an easy judgment might serve to decide the controversy. Now, these are, first, the exaltation of God's free grace (the merit of Christ), and secondly, the consolation of our souls. Let us consider them in order, and let each persuasion take its due.
OBJECTION III. Universal Redemption better represents the Love of God.
First, the exaltation of God's free grace. I do not know how it comes to pass, but so it is, that men have entertained a persuasion that the opinion of universal redemption better serves to set forth the love and free grace of God. Indeed, they make free grace, that glorious expression, to be nothing more than what is held forth in their opinion, namely, that God loves all, and gave Christ to die for all, and is ready to save all, if they will come to him. "This," they say, "is free grace and love magnified indeed; this is the universality of free grace," and similar flourishing expressions; "while the contrary opinion chains up the love and grace of God to a few."
But wait a moment. What, I ask, is this – your grace, free grace – that is universal?
Is it the grace of election? Truly not; for God has not chosen all to salvation, Rom. 9:11-12; 374 Eph. 1:4; 375 Rom. 8:28.
Is it the grace of effectual vocation? No, it is not this either.
Doubtless it cannot be; for "whom God calls he also justifies," and "glorifies," Rom. 8:30, 11:25-26, 29. No, all have not been and are not outwardly called, chap. 10:14.
Is it the grace of cleansing and sanctification? Why, are all purged?
Are all washed in the blood of Jesus? Or is it only the church that has been washed, as in Eph. 5:25-27?
378 Some, to be sure, are still
379 Faith is the principle of the heart's purification, and "all men do not have faith." defiled, Tit. 1:15.
Is it the grace of justification, the free love and mercy of God in pardoning and accepting sinners? But, friends, is this universal? Are all pardoned? Are all accepted? See Rom. 1:17,
381 3:22, 382 5:1.
Is it the grace of redemption in the blood of Christ? See, I pray, Rev.
5:9.
What then, I pray, is this – your universal free grace? Is it not universally a figment of your own brains? Or is it not a new name for that old idol, FreeWill? Is it not destructive to free grace in every branch of it? Does it not tend to evert the whole covenant of selective grace, evidently denying that the conditions 385 of that covenant are worked in any of the federates
386 by virtue of the promise of the covenant?
387 Are not the two great aims of their free grace to mock God and exalt themselves? Are they not proposing that the Lord makes a pretence of His love, good will, free grace, and pardon to all, never once acquainting the great number of them with any such love or good will? And he does so, they say, knowing that unless he effects it, they can never come to any such knowledge.
Do they not say, by their universal grace, that the Lord feigns that he loves all those who are outwardly called to the knowledge of these things, feigns that he has sent his Son to die for them all, and feigns that he desires that they all may be saved? For he does so upon such a condition that, without him, they can no more effect their salvation than climb to heaven by a ladder; and yet he will not effect it for them. Do they not openly make God say, "Such is my love, my universal grace, that I will freely love them by it, dare to joyfully embrace them in all things, except in what will do them good?" They would affirm God as a grossly counterfeiting hypocrite who would go to a poor blind man and tell him, "Alas, poor man, I pity your case; I see your want; I love you exceedingly; open your own eyes, and I will give you a hundred pounds." Dare they assign such deportment
388 to the most holy God of truth? Is their universal grace anything but mocking? Has what is common to all ever done good to anyone in particular as to their salvation? Are these not the two properties of God's grace in the Scripture:
that it is discriminating and effectual? And is not their grace anything else but these?
What if it were granted that all they say concerning the extent of grace is true. Is this such grace that ever saved a soul? If so, then why, I ask, are not all souls saved? "Why," they say, "because they do not believe." So then, the bestowing of faith is not part of this free grace. See their second aim: to exalt themselves and Free-Will into the place of grace, or at least they leave them room to come in, and to have the best share in the work of salvation: believing itself makes all the rest profitable. See, now, what universal free grace leads and tends toward. Are not the very terms opposite to one another? To bring in reprobates to be objects of free grace, they deny the free grace of God to the elect; to make it universal, they deny its effectualness; that all may have a share of it, they deny that any are saved by it: for "saving" grace must be restrained.
On the other side, in what way, I ask, does the doctrine of effectual redemption of God's elect only, in the blood of Jesus, impair the free grace of God? Is it in its freedom? Why, we say it is so free, that unless it is altogether free, it is no grace at all. Is it in its efficacy? Why, we say that by grace we are saved; we ascribe the whole work of our recovery and being brought to God in solidum 389 with it. Is it in its extent? We affirm that it is extended to every one that is, was, or ever will be delivered from the pit. It is true, we do not call grace that leads to hell free grace, in a gospel sense; for we deem the free grace of God so powerful, that wherever it has designed and chosen itself a subject, it brings that subject to Christ, God, salvation, and eternity.
"But you do not extend it to all; you tie it to a few." De te largitor, puer.
390Is extending the love and favor of God in our power? Does he not have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and does he not harden whom he will?
Yet, we affirm that it is extended universally to the saved ones. Should we throw the children's bread to the dogs? Friends, we believe that the grace of God in Christ works faith in every one to whom it is extended. We believe that the conditions of that covenant which is ratified in his blood are all effectually wrought in the heart of every covenantee. We believe that there is no love of God that is not effectual. We believe that the blood of Christ was not shed in vain. We believe that, of ourselves, we are dead in trespasses and sins, and can do nothing except what the free grace of God
works in us. And therefore, we cannot conceive that grace can be extended to all. For those of you who affirm that millions of those who are taken into a new covenant of grace perish eternally, and that it is left to men to believe that the will of God may be frustrated and his love be ineffectual, and that we distinguish ourselves one from another,
391 you may extend grace wherever you please. For it is indifferent to you whether the object of God's grace goes to heaven or to hell.
But in the meanwhile, I beseech you friends, give me leave to question whether what you talk of is God's free grace, or your own fond figment? Is it his love, or your wills? For the present, it truly seems to me that it is the latter only. Yet our prayers will be that God would give you infinitely more of his love than is contained in that ineffectual universal grace with which you so flourish.
392 Only, we will labor so that poor souls are not seduced by you with the specious pretences of free grace to all. They do not know that your free grace is a mere painted cloth, one that will give them no assistance at all to deliver them from that condition in which they are found, but will only give them leave to be saved if they can do it themselves.
Instead, they are ready, by the name you have given to the brat of your own brain, 393 to suppose you mean an effectual, almighty, saving grace, that will certainly bring all to God to whom it is extended, and about which they have heard in the Scripture. All the while, you laugh into your sleeves to think how simply these poor souls are deluded with your empty show, the substance of which is this, "Go your way; be saved if you can, in the way revealed; God will not hinder you."
OBJECTION IV. Universal Redemption better exalts the Merit of Christ.
Each party contests about the exaltation of the merit of Christ; making their mutual pretences. Something has been said about this before, so I will be brief. Take, then, only a short view of the difference that exists between them, where each pretends to exalt the merit of Christ in what is denied by the other, and this plea will suddenly be at an end.
First, there is only one thing that concerns the death of Christ by which the authors of the general ransom pretend to set forth the excellence of his death and oblation; namely, that the benefits of that death are extended to
everyone. By contrast, their adversaries restrict it to a few, a very few, in fact, to none but the elect. This, the authors of the general ransom say, is derogatory to the honor of the Lord Jesus Christ. And in this alone they pretend to so exceedingly advance his name and merit above the pitch of those who assert the effectual redemption of the elect only. The truth is, the measure of the honor of Jesus Christ is not to be assigned by us, poor worms of the dust; what he takes to be honor is what he gives and ascribes to himself, and nothing else. He has no need of our lie for his glory: so that if this did seem for the exaltation of the glory of Christ in our eyes, yet, arising from a lie of our own hearts, it would be an abomination to him.
Secondly, we deny that this serves in any way to set out the nature and dignity of the death of Christ; because the extent of his efficacy to all (if true) does not arise from its own innate sufficiency, but from the free pleasure and determination of God: how that is enervated by a pretended universality was declared earlier.
Thirdly, the value of a thing arises from its own native sufficiency and worth for any purpose to which it is to be employed; those who maintain effectual redemption assert that the sufficiency of the death of Christ is much above what any of their adversaries ascribe to it.
If I were now to declare in how many things the honor of Christ, and the excellence of his death and passion, along with the fruits of it, are contained in that doctrine we have sought to propound from the Scriptures, and compare them with those that are agreeable to the principal maxims of universal redemption, I would be forced to repeat much that has already been spoken. So it will suffice to present the reader with this following comparison between the two:
Universalists Scriptural Redemption.
1. Christ died for everyone, elect and reprobate.
1. Christ died for the elect only.
2. Most of those for whom Christ died are damned.
2. All of those for whom Christ died are certainly saved.
3. Christ, by his death, did not purchase any saving grace for those for whom he died.
3. Christ by his death purchased all saving grace for those for whom he died.
4. Christ took no care for the great part of those for whom he died, that they should ever hear one word of his death.
4. Christ sends the means and reveals the way of life to all those for whom he died.
5. Christ, in his death, did not ratify or confirm a covenant of grace with any federates, but only procured by his death that God might, if he would, enter into a new covenant with whomever he would, and upon whatever condition he pleased.
5. The new covenant of grace was confirmed to all the elect in the blood of Jesus.
6. Christ died, and yet no one might be saved.
6. Christ, by his death and based on God's covenant and compact, purchased an assured special people, the pleasure of the Lord prospering to the end in his hand.
7. Christ had no more intention to redeem his church, than he had to redeem the wicked seed of the serpent.
7. Christ loved his church, and gave himself for it.
8. Christ did not die for the infidelity of any.
8. Christ died for the infidelity of the elect.
Various other instances of a similar nature might be easily collected which, upon first viewing, the differences would quickly be determined. These few,
I have no doubt, are sufficient in the eyes of all experienced Christians, to evince how little conducive the general ransom is to the honor and glory of Jesus Christ, or to setting forth the worth and dignity of his death and passion.
OBJECTION V. Universal Redemption offers greater Consolation.
The next and last thing which comes under debate in this contest is gospel consolation, which God in Christ is abundantly willing that we should receive. A short discourse as to which of the two opinions gives the firmest basis and soundest foundation for it, will, by the Lord's assistance, lead us to an end of this long debate. The God of Truth and Comfort grant that all our undertakings for truth, or rather his workings in us, may end in peace and consolation!
To clarify this, some things need to be premised, such as:
1. All true evangelical consolation belongs only to believers, Heb. 6:1718, 394 God's people, Isa. 40:1-2; 395 while the "wrath of God abides" upon unbelievers, John 3:36.
2. To offer consolation to those to whom it is not due is no less a crime than to hide it from those to whom it does belong, Isa. 5:20;
396 Jer.
23:14; 397 Ezek. 13:10.
3. T. Moore's attempt to set forth the death of Christ so that all might be comforted, meaning everyone in the world, it would appear, is a proud attempt to make straight what God has made crooked, and it is most opposite to the gospel.
4. That doctrine which offers consolation from the death of Christ to unbelievers cries, "Peace, peace," when God says, "There is no peace."
These things being premised, I will briefly demonstrate the four following positions:
1. That extending the death of Christ to a universal object, cannot give the least ground of consolation to those whom God would have comforted by the gospel.
2. That denying the efficacy of the death of Christ towards those for whom he died cuts the nerves and sinews of all strong consolation, even what is proper for believers to receive, and specific to the gospel to give.
3. That there is nothing in the doctrine of redemption of the elect only, that in the least measure debars those to whom comfort is due from consolation.
4. That the doctrine of the effectual redemption of the sheep of Christ, by the blood of the covenant, is the true and solid foundation of all durable
consolation.
ANSWER:
1. Universal Redemption is no cause for Consolation.
We begin with the first, that extending the death of Christ toward a universal object has nothing in it that is unique to it, that can give the least basis of consolation to those whom God would comfort. That gospel consolation, to properly name it, is a fruit of actual reconciliation with God, and so it is proper and specific only to believers. I laid this down before, and my supposition is that it is a truth beyond all question and debate. Now, it is easily proved that no consolation can be conveyed to them out of anything specific to the general ransom. Take the following reasons: i. No consolation can arise for believers from what is nowhere proposed in the Scripture as a ground, cause, or matter of consolation, as the general ransom is not: for, First, what has no being can have no affection or operation;
Secondly, all the foundations and materials of consolation are things which are particular and specific only to some, as will be declared. ii. No consolation can accrue to believers from what is held in common between them and those whom, first, God would not have comforted; secondly, who will assuredly perish to eternity; thirdly, who stand in open rebellion against Christ; and fourthly, who never hear one word of the gospel or consolation. Now, the foundation of consolation, as proposed in and arising from the general ransom, equally appertains to all these others, and such as these, as it does to the finest of believers.
iii. Let a man test in a time of desertion and temptation, not in a time of disputation, what consolation or peace he can obtain for his soul from such a syllogism as this, "Christ died for all men; I am a man: therefore,
Christ died for me." Won't his own heart tell him that notwithstanding all that he is assured of in that conclusion, the wrath of God may still abide on him forevermore? Doesn't he see that, notwithstanding this, the Lord shows so little love towards millions upon millions of the sons of men, of whom that syllogism is as true as it is of himself (according to the general ransom), that the Lord does not once reveal himself or his Son to them?
What good will it do me to know that Christ died for me, if
notwithstanding that death, I may still perish forever? If you intend any consolation for me from what is common to all, then you must tell me what it is which all enjoy, which will satisfy my desires, and which flow from assurances of the love of God in Christ. If you cannot give me more to comfort me than what you might have given to Judas, can you expect me to be settled and consoled? If you cannot, then you are all truly miserable comforters, physicians of no value, Job's visitors, skillful only to add affliction to the afflicted.
"But be of good comfort," Arminians will say; "Christ is a propitiation for all sinners, and now you know yourself to be sinners."
ANSWER: True; but is Christ a propitiation for all the sins of those sinners? If so, how can any of them perish? If not, what good will this do me, whose sins (such as unbelief) are perhaps those for which Christ was not a propitiation? "But do not exclude yourself;" they say, "God excludes none; the love which caused him to send his Son was general towards all."
Don't tell me of God's excluding; I have sufficiently excluded myself! Will he powerfully take me in? Has Christ only purchased my admission, but not procured my ability to enter into his Father's arms? "Why, he has opened a door of salvation to all." Good grief! Isn't it a vain endeavor to open a grave for a dead man to come out? Who lights a candle for the blind man to see by? To open a door for someone to come out of prison who is blind, and lame, and bound, indeed dead, derides his misery rather than procures him liberty. Never tell me that what will bring me strong consolation and enjoyment will not preserve the great portion of men who perish everlastingly.
2. Universal Redemption undermines the true cause of Consolation.
The general ransom is so far from providing firm consolation for believers from the death of Christ, that it quite overthrows all the choice ingredients of strong consolation which do indeed flow from it; and it does that, first, by strangely dividing and tearing apart those things which ought to be conjoined to make up one certain foundation of confidence; and secondly, by denying the efficacy of Christ's death towards those for whom he died: both of which necessarily attend the persuasion of a general ransom.
400 of redemption (which in their judgment is the only proper immediate fruit and effect of Christ's death) from the First, they divide the impetration
application of that redemption, so that the one may belong to millions who have no share in the other. Indeed, that impetration of redemption may be obtained for all, and yet no one has it applied to them so as to be saved by it. Now, such as it is, this is an ineffectual and merely possible redemption, notwithstanding which all the sons of men might perish everlastingly. That is because, in this view, the impetration is the whole object of the death of Christ. It is separated and divided from all application of redemption to anyone in a way that might make it profitable and useful in the least measure. For Arminians deny that this application is a fruit of the death of Christ. If it were, then why is it not common to all for whom he died? What comfort this can afford any poor soul in the least degree is beyond my apprehension. "What shall I do?" asks the sinner; "The iniquity of my heels compasses me about.
401 I have no rest in my bones by reason of my sin:
and now, what will cause my sorrow to go?" Be of good cheer; Christ died for sinners. "Yes, but will the fruits of his death be certainly applied to all those for whom he died? If not, I may perish forever." Universalists refer him to his own strength in believing, or what, in the end, will be resolved into it, "et erit mihi magnus Apollo:"
403 and if they send him there, they acknowledge the consolation of which they boast properly proceeds from ourselves, and not from the death of Christ.
404 from the intercession of Jesus Christ offers little consolation to believers. Indeed, it quite everts it. There are, among others, two eminent passages of Scripture in which the Holy Ghost offers consolation to believers. It is offered against two general causes of all their troubles and sorrows, namely, their afflictions and their sins. The first is Rom. 8:32-34, Secondly, separating the oblation 405 and the other is 1Jn. 2:1-2.
406 In both passages, the apostles make the basis of the consolation which they demonstrate to believers in their afflictions and failings to be that tight bond, and inseparable connection, which exists between the oblation and the intercession of Jesus Christ. Let the reader consult both texts, and he will find that in this lies the stress, and in this consists the strength of what is proposed to console believers. In both places, this is what is principally intended. A more direct proof of this end and purpose cannot be produced.
Now, all of the authors of universal redemption divide and separate these two things. They allow no connection between them, nor any further dependence of one upon the other than is effected by the will of man. They
stretch Christ's oblation to all, but his intercession to a few only. Now, the death of Christ, separated from his resurrection and intercession, is nowhere proposed as a ground of consolation. Indeed, it is positively declared to be unsuitable to any such purpose, (1Cor. 15:14).
407 Certainly those who hold it out as such are no friends to Christian consolation.
Thirdly, they deny that the procurement of faith, grace, and holiness, which is the whole intent of the new covenant, and perseverance in them, by the death and blood-shedding of Jesus Christ, comes to all or any of those for whom he died. This assertion does not appear to be suitable to evoke consolation from his cross, as it is vainly pretended. What solid consolation can be drawn from such dry breasts as those from which none of these can flow? It was declared before that, according to the persuasion of those who assert universal grace, they do not immediately depend on the death of Christ. This is not only confessed by them, but they attempt to prove it.
Now, where should a soul look for these things, but in the purchase of Christ? From where should they flow, but from his side? Or is there any consolation to be had without them? Is not the strongest plea for these things, at the throne of grace, the procurement of them by the Lord Jesus?
What promise is there of anything without him? Are not all the promises of God yes and amen in him? Is there any attainment of these things in our own strength? Is this the consolation you afford us, to send us from free grace to free will? Where, I ask, according to this persuasion, should a poor soul go that finds himself lacking these things? "To God, who gives all freely," they say. But does God bless us with any spiritual blessings except in Jesus Christ? Does he bless us with anything in him except what he has procured for us? Is not all grace procured by a Mediator as well as dispensed in him? Is this a way to comfort a soul from the death of Christ, to let him know that Christ did not procure those things for him without which he cannot be comforted? "Credat Apella."
It is most apparent, then, that the pretended general ransom is far from being the basis of any solid consolation for those to whom it is due. It is directly destructive of, and diametrically opposed to, all those ways by which the Lord has declared himself willing to provide us comfort from the death of his Son. It dries up the breast and poisons the streams from which such comfort would be conveyed to our souls.
3. Particular Redemption does not abridge any part of a believer's Consolation.
The next thing we have to do is to show that the doctrine of the effectual redemption of the elect alone by the blood of Jesus is not liable to any justifiable exception as to this particular. Nor does it in any way abridge any part or portion of the believer's consolation which God intends him to receive. The only thing which is objected by its opposers with any measure of reason, comes to this: "That there is nothing in the Scripture by which any man can assure himself that Christ died for him in particular, unless we grant that he died for all." We are not at all moved by their exclamation that countless souls are shut out from any share in the blood of Christ, seeing that those shut out are confessedly reprobate unbelievers and persons impenitent to the end.
First, it is the experience of all believers that, by the grace of God, they have assured their hearts of their share and interest in Christ as held out to them in the promise, without the least thought of universal redemption: a sufficient testimony that this is notoriously false.
Secondly, it has acknowledged by all that there is an infallible assurance which arises from a practical syllogism 409 of which one proposition is true in the word, and the second is true by the witness of the Spirit in the heart.
Now, all believers may have such assurance that Christ died for them, with the intent and purpose to save their souls. For instance: all believers may draw this conclusion out of the truth of the word and the faith created in their hearts:
First, "Christ died for all believers," that is, all who choose him and rest upon him as an all-sufficient Savior; it is not that he died for them as such, but that all such believers are of those for whom he died. He did not die for believers as believers, though he died for all believers; but instead, he died for all the elect as elect, who, by the benefit of his death, become believers, and so obtain assurance that he died for them. For those who are elected but who are not yet believers, though Christ died for them, we deny that they can have any assurance of it while they continue as unbelievers. You are supposing a foul contradiction if you say that a man can be said to have assurance that Christ died for him in particular while
he still continues as an unbeliever. This first proposition, as laid down in the beginning, is true in the word in countless passages.
Secondly, in the witness of the Spirit, the heart of a believer assumes, "But I believe in Christ;" that is, "I choose him for my Savior; I cast myself on him alone for salvation, and give myself up to him, to be disposed of according to his own mercy." There are also many testimonies in the word of the truth of this proposition in the heart of a believer, and the infallibility of it, as is known to all. From this the conclusion is,
"Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ died for me in particular, with an intention and purpose to save me."
This is a syllogism that all believers, and only believers, can justly make, so that it is unique to them alone; and this treasure of consolation is to be imparted to them alone. The sufficiency of the death of Christ to save every one that comes to him, without exception, is enough to fill all the invitations and entreaties of the gospel to sinners, and to induce them to believe. And when they do so, by the grace of Christ obtaining the promise, the forementioned infallible assurance of the intention and purpose of Christ to redeem them by his death is made known to them (Matt. 1:21).
Now, let each man judge for himself whether this is a better foundation for a man to assure his soul rest and peace than what our opposers, suitable to their own principles, must lay as a common stone for men, namely, "Christ died for all men; I am a man: therefore Christ died for me." Especially consider that indeed the first proposition is absolutely false, and that the conclusion, if it could be true, yet, according to their persuasion, it can no more be a basis of our consolation than Adam's fall. All this is not spoken as though one opinion or the other were able to give consolation by itself.
God alone, in the sovereignty of his free grace, can and does create such consolation; but it is spoken only to show what principles are suitable to the means by which God works on and towards his elect.
4. Particular Redemption is the solid foundation of all enduring Consolation.
What should close our discourse is drawing gospel consolation from the death of Christ, which is effectual only for the elect for whom alone he died; but I will not proceed in this. Consider, first, how abundantly this has been done by various eminent and faithful laborers in the vineyard of the
Lord already; secondly, how it is the daily task of the preachers of the gospel to make it out to the people of God; thirdly, how it would carry me beyond my purpose to speak of things in a practical and atheological way, having designed this discourse to be purely polemical; and, fourthly, that such things are no more expected nor welcome to wise and learned men, in controversies of this nature, than knotty, crabbed, scholastic objections are expected or welcome in popular sermons and doctrinal discourses, which are intended merely for edification.
Conclusion Just in closing, I desire the reader to peruse that one passage, Rom. 8:32-34; and I have no doubt that he will, if not already infected with the leaven of the error which I have opposed, conclude with me that if there is any comfort, any consolation, any assurance, any rest, any peace, any joy, any refreshment, any exultation of spirit, to be obtained here below, it is all to be had in the blood of Jesus long since shed, and in his intercession still continuing. Both are appropriated and united to the elect of God by the precious effects and fruits of those who are both drawn to believe and preserved in believing, in order to obtain an immortal crown of glory that will not fade away.
To the Only Wise God, through Jesus Christ, be the glory forever. Amen
A FEW TESTIMONIES OF THE ANCIENTS.
I. CHURCH of SMYRNA,
This confession of the holy Church was given a little after the commendation given to it by the Holy Ghost in Revelation 2:9,
413 and upon the martyrdom of Polycarpus:
{Ote ou]te to<n Cristo>n pote katalei>pein dunhsa>meqa to<n uJpe<r th~v tou~ ko>smou tw~n swzwme>nwn dwthxi>av paqo>nta, ou[te e{teron timh~| se>zein.– Euseb. Hist. Eccles., lib. 4: cap. 15. – "Neither can we ever forsake Christ, the one who suffered for the salvation of the world of those who are saved, nor worship any other."
[It is an extract from a letter of the church of Smyrna to the churches of Pontus, giving an account of the martyrdom of Polycarp.]
II. The witness of holy IGNATIUS, As he was transported to Rome from Antioch, to be thrown to the beasts for the testimony of Jesus, Epist. ad Philad. [cap. ix., A.D. 107]
Ou+to>v ejstin hJ pro<v to<n Pate>ra a]gousa ojdo>v, hJ pe>tra, oJ fragmo>v, hJ klei>v, oJ poim>h>n, to< iJerei~on, hJ zu>ra th~v gnw>sewv di j h=v eijsh~lqon
Azraa<m kai< jIsaa<k kai< jIakw>z, Mwsh~v, kai< oJ su>mpav tw~n profhtw~n coro>v, kai< oiJ stu>loi tou~ ko>smou oiJ apo>stoloi kai< hJ nu>mfh tou~ Cristou~, uJpe<r h+v, fernh~v lo>gw|, ejxe>cev to< oijkei~on ai=ma i[na aujth<n ejxagora>sh|. – "This is the way leading to the Father, this the rock, the fold, the key; he is the shepherd, the sacrifice; the door of knowledge, by which entered Abraham, Isaac,
Jacob, Moses, and the whole company of prophets, and the pillars of the world, the apostles, and the spouse of Christ; for whom, instead of a dowry, he poured out his own blood, that he might redeem her."
III. CLEMENS,
"Whose name is in the book of life," Philippians 4:3, with the whole church at Rome in his days, in the epistle to the church of Corinth:
Dia< th<n ajga>phn h{n ejscen pro<v hJma~v to< ai=ma aujtou~ ejdwken uJpe<r hJmw~n ejn zelh>mati aujtou~ kai< th<n sa>rka uJpe<r th~v sarko<v hJmw~n kai< th<n yuch<n uJpe<r yucw~n hJmw~n. – "For the love which he had toward us, he gave his blood for us, according to his purpose, and his flesh for our flesh, and his life for our lives."
Here you have assigned, 1. The cause of Christ's death: his love toward us;
2. The object of it: us, that is, believers; 3. The manner in which he redeemed us: by commutation.
This triple testimony is taken from the very best of uncontested antiquity.
IV. CYPRIAN,
Epistle 62 written to Caecilius, a holy, learned, and famous martyr, A.D.
250:
"Nos omnes portabat Christus, quiet peccata nostra portabat." – "The one who bore all of us, bore our sins;" that is, he sustained those for whom he died on the cross. The same was written to Demetrian: – "Hanc gratiam Christus impertit, subigendo mortem trophaeo cracis, redimendo credentem pretio sanguinis sui." – "Christ has communicated this grace, subduing death in the trophy of his cross, redeeming believers with the price of his blood."
The same writer, or some other ancient and pious writer of the cardinal works, in Christ, Serm. 7, secund. Rivet. Crit. Sac. in Cyp. [lib. 2:cap. 15]
Scultet. Medul. Pat. Erasm. praefat, ad lib.
414 This same author also expressly mentions the sufficiency of the ransom paid by Christ, arising from the dignity of his person: – "Tantae dignitatis illa una Redemptoris nostri fuit oblatio, ut una ad tollenda mundi peccatum sufficeret." – "Of so great dignity was the oblation of our Redeemer, that it alone was sufficient to take away the sins of the world."
V. CYRIL Of Jerusalem, in Cataches. 13. [A.D. 350]: – Kai< mh< qauma>sh|v eij ko>smov o[lov ejlutrw>qh, ouj ga<r h+n a]nqrwpov yilo<v ajlla< uiJo<v Qeou~ menogenh<v oJ uJperapoqnh>skwn—kai< eij po>te dia< pisteu>ontev eijv para>deison oujk eijseleu>sontai; – "Do not wonder if the whole world is redeemed; for he was not a mere man, but the only-begotten Son of God that died. If, then, through the eating of the tree" (that is, the forbidden tree) "they were cast out of paradise, then certainly now, by the tree of Jesus" (that is, the cross) "shall not believers more easily enter into paradise?"
And so another of them makes it manifest in what sense they use the word all.
VI. ATHANASIUS,
Writing of the incarnation of the Word of God [A.D. 350]:
Ou+to>v ejstin hJ pa>ntwn zwh>, kai< wJv pro>Zaton uJpe<r, th~v pa>ntwn swthri>av ajntik>yucon to< eJautou~ sw~ma eijv za>naton paradou>v.
—"He is the life of all, and as a sheep he delivered his body as a price for the souls of all, that they might be saved."
"All" in both passages (Cyril and Athanasius) can be none but the elect; as in the following, –
VII. AMBROSE
de Vocat. Gen., lib. 1: cap. 3; or rather, PROSPER, lib. 1:cap. 9, edit. Olivar. [A.D. 370]: – "Si non credis, non descendit tibi Christus, non tibi passus est." – "If you do not believe, then Christ did not descend for you, and he did not suffer for you."
Ambr. de Fide ad Gratianum: – "Habet populus Dei plenitudinem suam. In electis enim et praescitis, atque ab omnium generalitate discretis, specialis quaedam censetur universitas, ut de toto mundo totus mundus liberatus, et de omnibus hominibus omnes homines videantur assumpti."
– "The people of God has its own fullness. In the elect and foreknown, distinguished from the generality of all, there is accounted a certain special universality; so that the whole world seems to be delivered from the whole world, and all men seem to be taken out of all men."
In this passage, Ambrose proceeds at large to declare the reasons why, in this business, "all" and "the world" are so often used for "some of all sorts."
These quotations that follow were written after the rising of the Pelagian heresy, which gave rise to greater diligence in searching out the use of these words, and greater wariness in their expression, than had formerly been exercised by some.
VIII. AUGUSTINE,
de Cor. et Grat. cap. 40: [A.D. 420]: – "Per hunt Mediato-rem Deus ostendit eos, quos ejus sanguine redemit, facere se ex malis in aeternum honos." – "By him the Mediator, the Lord declares himself to make those whom he has redeemed with his blood, of evil, good to eternity."
"Vult possidere Christus quod emit; tanti emit ut possideat." – "Christ will possess what he bought; he bought it with such a price that he might possess it."
Idem, Serm. 44: de Verbis Apost.: – "Qui nos tanto pretlo emit non vult perire quos emit." – "The one who bought us with such a price will have none perish whom he has bought." Idem, Tract. lXXXvii, in Johan.: – "Ecclesiam plerumque etiam ipsam mundi nomine appellat; sicut est illud,
'Deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi;' itemque illud, 'Non venit Filius hominis ut judicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum;' et in epistola sua Johannes ait, 'Advocatum habemus ad Patrem, Jesum Christum justum, et ipse propitiator est peecatorum nostrorum, non tantum nostrorum sed etiam totius mundi.' Totus ergo mundus est ecclesia, et totus mundus odit ecclesiam. Mundus igitur odit mundum; inimicus reconciliatum, damnatus, salvatum, inquinatus mundatum. Sed iste mundus quem Deus in Christo recon-ciliat sibi, et qui per Christum salvatur, de mundo electus est inimico, damnato, contaminato." – "He often calls the church itself by the name of the world; as in, 'God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself;' and, 'The Son of man came not to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.' And John in his
epistle says, 'We have an Advocate, and he is the propitiation for [our sins, and not for ours only, but also for] the sins of the whole world.' The "whole world", therefore, is the church, and the world hates the church. Does the world then hate the world? What is at enmity with God? Is it the reconciled? Is it the condemned, or the saved? Is it the polluted world, or the cleansed world? And that world which God in Christ reconciles to himself, and which is saved by Christ, is chosen out of the opposite, condemned, defiled world."
Much more to this purpose might be easily cited out of Augustine, but his judgment in these things is known to all.
IX. PROSPER
[A.D. 440], Respon. ad Capit. Gall. cap. 9.: – "Non est crucifixus in Christo qui non est membrum corporis Christi. Cum itaque dicatur Salvator pro totius mundi redemptione crucifixus, propter veram humanse naturae susceptionem, potest tamen dici pro his tantum crucifixus quibus mors ipsius profuit. Diversa ab istis sors eorum est qui inter illos censentur de quibus dicitur, 'Mundus enim non cognovit.'"– "No one is crucified with Christ who is not a member of the body of Christ.
When, therefore, our Savior is said to be crucified for the redemption of the whole world, because of his true assumption of the human nature, yet he may be said to be crucified only for those to whom his death was profitable. In contrast to these is that lot who are reckoned among those of whom it is said, 'The world knew him not.'"
Idem, Resp. Object. Vincen. Res. i.: – "Redemptionis proprietas, haud dubie penes illos est, de quibus princeps mundi missus est foras. Mors Christi non ita impensa est humano generi, ut ad redemptionem ejus etiam qui regenerandi non erant pertinerent." – "Doubtless the propriety of redemption belongs to those from whom the prince of this world is cast out. The death of Christ is not to be laid out for human-kind as a whole, so that those who were not to be regenerated should also belong to his redemption."
Idem, de Ingrat., cap. 9.: – "Sed tamen haec aliqua sivis ratione tueri Et credi tam stulta cupis; jam pande quid hoc sit, Quod bonus omnipotensque Deus, non omnia subdit Corda sibi, pariterque omnes jubet esse fideles?
Nam si nemo usquam est quem non velit esse redemptum, Haud dubie impletur quicquid vult summa potestas. Non omnes autem salvantur" –. "If there are none whom God would not have redeemed, why are not all saved?"
X. CONCIL. VALENTINUS, can. 4:
– "Pretium mortis Christi datum est pro iIlis tan-turn quibus Dominus ipse dixit, 'Sicut Moses exaltavlt serpentem in deserto, ita ex-altari oportet Filius hominis, ut omnis qui credit in ipso non pereat, sed habeat vitam eternam.'" – "The price of the death of Christ is given for those alone of whom the Lord himself said, 'As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whoever believes on him should not perish.'"
APPENDIX A Reply to Mr. Joshua Sprigge On the occasion of a recent book published by Mr Joshua Sprigge containing erroneous doctrine.
READER, I do earnestly entreat your serious perusal of this short appendix. The total finishing and printing, not only of the body of the discourse, but also the preface, before occasion was given to those thoughts which I now desire to communicate, is the rise of this ataxy.
416 This, being irrecoverable, requires no further apology. In the third division of this treatise there are various chapters, namely, 7–9, etc., about the satisfaction of Christ, in which the doctrine is cleared and vindicated from the objections of some. The first aim I had in those chapters was to show the inconsistency of that satisfaction with the general ransom, principally now opposed. In handling it, my eye was chiefly on the Socinians, the known opposers of the person, grace, and merit of Christ. They are the most wretched prevaricators in Christian religion which any age ever yet produced. In the manner of asserting my opposition, I did not look outside the scriptural proposal of Christ's satisfaction, nor did I turn to any controversies, except to remark concerning some parora~mata and (I fear willful) failings and mistakes of Grotius in stating this business.
417 His wretched apostasy into the very dregs of the error (in the judgment of some) strongly opposed even by himself now, sufficiently authorizes anyone to lay open his treacherous handling of these matters in his first undertaking.
If the reader has any doubt of this, let him compare the exposition of various texts of Scripture in Grotius' book against those of Socinus, which Grotius has since given in his so much admired (indeed, in very many things, is so much to be abhorred) Annotations on the Bible; and, by their inconsistency the reader will quickly perceive the steadfastness of that man to his original principles of apostasy. Great as he was, he was not big enough to contend with truth. Moreover, I had it in my thoughts to endeavor to remove (as I then thought) a scruple 418 from the minds of some wellmeaning persons, who weakly apprehend that the eternal love of God
toward his elect was inconsistent with the satisfaction of Christ; and who therefore began to apprehend, and to instantly to divulge abroad that Christ came only to declare the love of the Father, and to make it manifest to us, so that we, in the apprehension of it, might be drawn to him. That is the manner of doing things in our days; everyone casts upon others the crudities of their own stomach, and scatters abroad undigested conceptions, waiting for someone to lick their deformed offspring, and to see what other capricious brains can make of what they themselves do not know how to improve. So that, as regards personal satisfaction and merit, these become but empty terms, obscuring the true gospel which holds out no such things.
Now, concerning this I know the following:
1. That this new-named free grace, this glorious height and attainment, this varnished deity, was at first in its original "truncus ficulnus,"
419 – an old, rotten, over-worn, Arminian objection, raised out of the obs. and sols.
420 of the old schoolmen, to oppose the doctrine of effectual redemption by Christ, or else to overthrow the doctrine of eternal election; for they framed it to look both ways (either we are not chosen in this way, or we are not redeemed in this way), not caring which part of their work it did, so it would be useful in any measure. This was the birth and rise of this "glorious discovery".
2. That of its own accord, it tends toward the very bottom of Socinian folly; indeed, it is the very same opinion in its substance with which the Socinians have so long troubled the churches of God. They are deservedly esteemed accursed by those churches for preaching another gospel. The sum of this discovery comes to this, that there is no vindicating justice in God, no wrath or anger against sin, nothing requiring satisfaction for it. That Christ came to declare this, and to make known the way of going to the Father,
421 is that very Helena 422 for which the Socinians have so long contended with so much fraud and subtlety, and with so many Sinonian arts.
3. That it is to the extreme dishonor of Jesus Christ, destructive to the gospel faith and of all solid consolation, and it forces men either to a familistical contempt 424 or sophistical corrupting of the word of God in its defense. Upon these and similar considerations and apprehensions, I deemed that it might not be in vain to disprove the main assertion and also manifest the miserable inconsequence, from its assertion of God's eternal
love to the denial of satisfaction. In what manner the Lord enabled me to perform, you must know, reader, in the text mentioned above. At that time I had only had one conference with someone about it; and for books I had only seen a few, and those were so exceedingly inconsiderable, so fully familistical, and forced with so much contempt of the word, that I was not willing to cast away the least moment on them.
But now, some few days ago (to come to the occasion of this appendix), there came into my hands a book written by Mr Sprigge who, both in his preface to the reader and in various passages in the treatise itself, labors to commend to the world this "glorious discovery", that Christ did not purchase peace for us but only preached peace to us; that he came only to reveal and declare the love of God, not to procure it; that we only are reconciled to God by him, which he proves from Romans 5:11,
425 but that no reconciliation with God is procured; that this discovery, and the like, are what we have prayed for all this while – his Preface to the Reader.
So it is also asserted in many places of the treatise itself, pp. 65,101. Indeed, everywhere it is his main scope. He bids us not to think that the heart of God was set on having a little blood (see Eph 5:2)
426 for the sins of his people, p. 59. These things are but pleasant tales and childish things with which to allure us, p. 46. In short, one main aim of the book is to make the whole ministration of Christ out to be the discovery of a mystery that is nowhere revealed in the word. It is not my purpose here to view the whole, or to separate the chaff from the wheat in it, or to distinguish between the spiritual truths and smoky vapors that are interwoven in it, but only to caution the reader a little about that one thing I intimated before, with some brief expostulations about it.
Let me inform you, as well, that my motive here flows not only from the book itself, but also from the pretended "imprimatur"
427 annexed to it. You will find the truth itself, in opposition to this dangerous notion and the whole fallacy of it, sufficiently confirmed from the Scripture in the foregoing treatise. Christians will not, I hope, be easily shaken from the truth of the word by any pretended revelations whatever. Only, because the greater reputation of the reverend and learned licenser is affixed to the treatise (I know not whether duly), and until he has vindicated himself lest it insinuate itself by the help of his name, I desire to give you these few
observations here as a foretaste, reserving you for full satisfaction to what is held out from the word herein in the foregoing treatise.
First, then, observe the absurd consequence, deduced from this position, that Christ is not the cause but the effect of love – namely, that he did not purchase life, peace, and salvation for us. This consequence flows merely from ignorance of the love of God, and it confounds those things which ought to be distinguished. Some look upon love in God as an unchangeable affection, when the truth is, as an affection or passion, it has no place in God at all. All agree that love in spirits, and partly in men, is in appetitu intellectivo, in the will, the intellectual appetite; and there it is defined to be qe>lein tini< to< ajgaqo>n, "to will good to any one." Certainly, then, in God his love is but a pure act of his will. That love which was the cause of sending his Son is, I say, an act of his will, his good pleasure, – not a natural affection reserved to the creature. There is no such affection in God, as I have abundantly proved in this treatise.
Now, as to his assertion that this love, this act of God's will, was not purchased, not procured by Christ: very true; who ever was so mad as to affirm it? Can a temporal thing be the cause of what is eternal? This is not at all the meaning of those who affirm that Christ procured the love of his
Father for us. No; but the effects of this purpose, the fruits of this love, are commonly called "love" in the Scripture, because affections are ascribed to God in respect to their effects. Now, for the proof that Christ purchased these fruits for us, see afterward. This eternal act of God's will, this love, which was the impetus to send Jesus Christ, tended to his glory in these two acts: first, by removing the wrath, death, curse, and guilt from those for whom
Christ was sent, by the satisfaction of God's vindicating justice; secondly, by the actual procuring of grace and glory for them, by merit and impetration. These things, though they are not the love of God, which is immanent in Himself, yet they are those things alone by which we enjoy his love, and are purchased by Christ; which I must not prove here, lest I should actum agere.
Secondly, An eternal act of God's will, immanent in himself, puts no change of condition into the creature. See what the Scripture says of the elect notwithstanding this, Ephesians 2:3; John 3:36. Let not the word be
despised nor corrupted. Do not be wise above what is written. "Though an angel," etc., Galatians 1:8. Until he draws us, the fruit of his death is kept for us in the justice and fidelity of God.
Thirdly, These things being premised, and to clear the truth in this point, I desire a fair and candid answer to these queries:
First, What is the meaning of that phrase in Hebrews 2:17, Eijv to< iJla>skesqai ta<v aJmarti>av tou~ laou~, "To make reconciliation for the sins of the people," and this being done as a priest towards God, Hebrews
5:1, – is the meaning of it a declared love from God to man?
Secondly, Is not the purpose of various typical sacrifices to make an atonement with God on behalf of those for whom they were sacrifices?
Exodus 29:33,36; 30:10,15,16; Leviticus 6:7; Numbers 16:46, and many other places; – is this to turn away the wrath of God, or to reconcile men to him?
Thirdly, Is not the death of Christ a proper sacrifice? Ephesians 5:2; Hebrews 9:26,28; John 1:29; is it not the antitype of all sacrifices, in which they find their accomplishment? And did it not really effect what they carnally and typically figured? Hebrews 9:11-14, etc., 10:1-7, etc.
And was it not offered to God?
Fourthly, Was not Jesus Christ a priest for his people, to deal with God on their behalf, Hebrews 2:17, 5:1,2, 7:26,27; was he not as well a prophet, to deal with them on behalf of God? Do not all the acts of his priestly office immediately tend towards God to procure good things for those in whose behalf he is a priest?
Fifthly, Does not Christ, by his intercession, appear before God to declare the love of God toward His people? Or is it to procure further fruits of love for his people? Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25, 9:24.
Sixthly, Did not Christ, by and in the oblation of himself, through the eternal Spirit, pay a ransom, or a valuable price of redemption, into the hand of his Father for the sins of the people? Matthew 26:28; Mark 10:45;
1Timothy 2:6; Ephesians 5:2; Job 33:24. And is a ransom not the price of deliverance, which argues for a commutation? Exodus 21:30, 30:12. Or did Christ pay a ransom to his Father for the souls and sins of his people, thereby declaring to his people that there was no need of any such thing?
And what do you think of the old saying of Tertullian, "Omnia in imagines vertunt, imaginarii ipsi Christiani?"
Seventhly, Did not Christ in his death bear our sins? John 1:29; 1Pet.2:24; Isaiah 53:6,11; 2Corinthians 5:21. And does "bear sin" in the Scripture not mean to bear the punishment due to sin? Leviticus 5:1, etc. And is not undergoing the punishment due to sin, making satisfaction for sin?
Eighthly, Did not Christ, as our surety, undergo all that is anywhere threatened for sin, and due for sin by the justice of God? Hebrews 7:22,
4:15; Galatians 3:13; 2Corinthians 5:21; Hebrews 5:7; Luke 22:44, etc.
Ninthly, Are not the purchase and procurement of good things assigned to the death of Christ? Isaiah 53:5; Hebrews 9:12; Acts 20:28;
1Thessalonians 5:9; Luke 1:74; Romans 5:10; Ephesians 2:16, etc.
Tenthly, Seeing that Romans 5:11, "By whom we have now received the atonement," is urged to disprove the purchase of peace and reconciliation with God for us, does "the atonement" there mean our reconciliation to God? And is it proper to say that we have received or accepted our conversion or reconciliation?
Eleventhly, He asserts that all that was done in and by Christ was but a sign and representation of what is done spiritually in us; does that not destroy the first promise, Genesis 3:15, indeed, the whole gospel, and make it, as it is called, a "childish thing?"
Twelfthly, Is it fair and allowable for men professing the name of Christ, in the trial of truth, to decline the word of God? Is not such a declension an invincible demonstration of a guilt of falsehood? Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32;
Joshua 1:7; Psalm 19:7; Proverbs 30:6; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 1:4, 16:29; John 5:39, 20:30,31; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 Thessalonians 2:2; 1Timothy 6:20;
2Timothy 3:16,17; 2Peter 1:19, etc.
This much, courteous reader, I thought good to premise to you, though it is out of order after discovering a new opposition made to a precious truth of God, which you will find explained and asserted in the foregoing treatise.
And I hope I have assumed this liberty without offending any. It is not about trifles that I contend (I abhor such ways), but for the faith once delivered to the saints. Now, "Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith,
from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Grace be with all those who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. Amen."
COGGESHALL, APRI 25, 1648.
Notes [←1] This nobleman is represented by Neal as having been "the greatest patron of the Puritans." He was admiral of the parliamentary fleet. He seized on the ships belonging to the king, and during the whole course of the war made use of them against the royal interest. Owen had received the presentation to Coggeshall from this nobleman, whose upright and amiable character was celebrated long after his death under the designation of The Good Earl Of Warwick. – ED.
[←2] Rom 9:11-13: (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calls;) It was said to her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, 'Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.'
[←3] Gen 9:25: And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be to his brothers.
[←4] The Latin name for the Semitic god Baal – also Bacchus.
[←5] Pallas Athena: Greek Goddess of wisdom
[←6] A limit that when passed over or exceeded, allows no return. When Julius Caesar defied the civil authority and crossed the River Rubicon with his army in 49 B.C, it began a civil war.
[←7] Ezek. 15:3.
[←8] Virg. Aen. 8:273, et seq.
[←9] They say that in 356 B.C., Herostratus, in order to insure his immortal fame, burned down the great temple of Diana (Artemision) at Ephesus, one of the seven wonders of the ancient world.
[←10] Helen of Troy whose beauty seduced Paris and led to the Trojan war.
[←11] Origen taught that even the devils who have been chosen will be saved. In the 16th century
Puccius and Huberus repeated his teachings.
[←12] Laert. in Vit. Epimen.
[←13] Plato de Legib., lib. 7.
[←14] "Hierome" in Owen's original text.
[←15] John 3:36: He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that believes not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him.
[←16] That is, to be contentious.
[←17] To create divisions and become an outcast.
[←18] What flows gently and soothes the soul.
[←19] Ad.Mar.
[←20] Ovid. Met. 2:79
[←21] A reference to a mythical lizard-like monster that lived in fire to quench its body's chill.
[←22] Eph. 3:8
[←23] Vindication of Redemption, by my reverend and learned brother, Mr. John Stalham; Mr.
Rutherford, Christ Drawing Sinners.
[←24] That is, atonement.
[←25] In this chapter, Owen presents three arguments made by universalists: first, that he died for all, but only intercedes for the church; second, that Christ died for all so that some sinners may be persuaded; and third, that as Priest, his sacrifice is for one purpose and all men. All three arguments assume Christ's sacrifice can be separated from his intercession. Owen rejects such a separation of his offices of Mediator and Priest.
[←26] Thomas Moore. See Prefatory remark and Chap. VIII, Sec. II. Note.
[←27] Owen's line of reasoning up to here is a bit difficult to follow. Some Arminians assert that Christ died for all, and that he paid a ransom for all, but he does not intercede for all. Here
Owen is saying that if he died for a person, then he paid a ransom for that person. That is because the point of his death was in fact to pay a ransom. Everyone agrees to this. Owen goes on to say that the point of paying a ransom is to apply the benefit of that payment (freedom from condemnation) to the person for whom it was paid. Applying the benefit begins with his intercession. Therefore, Christ is bound to intercede for all those for whom he died, because he paid a ransom for each one of them. Owen's point of contention with the Arminians is this: if Christ died for all, and a general ransom was paid for all, and yet all are not saved, then some for whom a ransom was paid were not freed from their debt of sin –how could Christ's intercession for them fail? Owen's underlying assumption is that Christ successfully intercedes for anyone for whom he paid a ransom. Arminians who argue for a general ransom reject that assumption. But Owen argues that by doing so they are also rejecting the very idea of a ransom. And so some Arminians might say that Christ died for all, but did not pay a ransom for all. Owen argues here that this would reject the very purpose of Christ's dying for them.
Hence his incredulity that anyone would make such a claim.
[←28] The word 'specially' [NT:3122 malista] can also be rendered 'in particular' or 'specifically'
[←29] This tradesman who answers the argument against Universalism is Thomas Moore. See the Prefatory Note and Chap. VIII, sec. II. Note..
[←30] It means, "scram" (or begone) "you babblers!" Obviously, Owen will suffer no fools.
[←31] Literally, "Let the Jew Apella believe it," from the Satires of Horace. He could have said, "Tell that to the Marines," the final authority on tall tales. It refers to an obvious absurdity. See
Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable.
[←32] This is not the Thomas More who was Lord Chancellor under King Henry VIII (1478-1535).
See the Prefatory Note for more information about this Thomas Moore.
[←33] That is, they must choose their salvation, dependent on the persuasiveness of believers. They are no different than Adam who chose to sin, succumbing to the persuasiveness of the serpent.
Their good, like Adam's curse, will follow from their choice. Owen is really asking what changed in all this when Christ went to the cross?
[←34] The hypothesis is that he intercedes for all so that some might be persuaded by believers. If Christ intercedes only for the church, then others cannot be persuaded because he has not interceded for them. The hypothesis fails because universal intercession is its premise.
[←35] There is a larger unstated proposition here. If Christ's universal intercession is true, then everyone in the world, in each generation, must have the opportunity to hear and be persuaded by the gospel. Their salvation would no longer be dependent on their own response, or on the sovereign election of God, or on Christ's work on the cross, but on the actions of believers. In essence, Christ would be pushing his responsibility for their salvation onto the church.
[←36] That is, if his intercession is universal, then either he would be interceding or entreating for what his Father does not will, or his Father would be breaking his promise to hear him.
[←37] Universalists urge that he interceded for all by his prayer, but all are not saved, such as the chief priests. This is said to support their claim that Christ died for all, but successfully intercedes only for believers. Owen rightly limits the objects of Christ's prayer to his crucifiers who were present, and as to them, Christ prays only that this sin of theirs be forgiven, not all of their sins. Even if all of their sins were forgiven, and they were saved, it still would not apply to all men.
[←38] John 17:21-23: That they all may be one; as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that you have sent me. And the glory which you gave me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and you in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that you have sent me, and have loved them, as you have loved me.
[←39] Christ prays that the whole world might be convinced of who he is by the testimony of the church, not that the whole world might be saved by believing in him. Even devils believe, in the sense of knowing who he is, and they tremble, but they are not saved, Jms. 2:19.
[←40] Heb 9:14-15: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
For this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, those who are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
[←41] Matt 26:28: This is my blood of the new testament, shed for many for the remission of sins.
[←42] Eph 1:7; Col 1:14: In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
[←43] Heb 9:26: For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world he has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
[←44] Ps 8:5-8: You have given him dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet, all sheep and oxen – even the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea that pass through the paths of the seas.
[←45] John 3:35 - The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand.
Matt 11:27 - All things are delivered to me by my Father: and no man knows the Son, but the Father; nor does any man know the Father, save the Son, and whomever the Son reveals him to.
[←46] Eph. 1:6
[←47] "entirely God's work"
[←48] The reader may be referred to the treatise by the author at the end of this volume, "De Divinâ
Justitiâ," for the full and mature expression of his views on the necessity of the atonement. In the statements above, it is implied that salvation might have been accomplished without the absolute necessity of such a satisfaction to the claims of justice as the death of Christ afforded.
Dr Owen, it will be found in the treatise referred to, latterly changed his views on this point, and held the necessity for the satisfaction of divine justice by an atonement, in order to salvation, to be absolute. — Ed.
[←49] Gen 3:15 - And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.
[←50] Jer 31:33, 34 - But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, says the LORD, I will place my law in their core, and write it in their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people… for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
[←51] Eph. 1:6
[←52] For "he set forth Christ to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, that he might be just, and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus," Rom. 3:25, 26
[←53] John 4:34 - My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.
[←54] Heb. 10:1
[←55] Rom 5:9-11 - having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved by His life.
[←56] Rom 5:19 - For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.
[←57] Dan 12:2 - And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
[←58] Rom 5:19 - For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
[←59] See Owen's presupposition concerning ends and means, Chap. II. sec. II.
[←60] Matt. 20:28; John 10:15, 27-28;
[←61] Eph. 5:25;
[←62] Matt. 7:23; 13:24-25 ; 25:32; John 8:19, 42-47; 10:14, 26;
[←63] See John 12:39,40 – The word "enabled" has been added to the text to clarify Owen's thought.
This is the logic: if Christ's sheep believe, and those who are not his sheep do not believe, then it must be that those who are not his sheep cannot believe, or else they would be his sheep. It is not a matter of volition and choice. The condition of being his sheep is what enables the elect to believe; and by extension, those who are not his sheep do not believe because their condition will not permit it.
[←64] John 10:15 - As the Father knows me, so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.
[←65] John 10:18 - This commandment have I received of my Father.
[←66] John 15:13 - Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
[←67] Owen is referring to their external calling (vocation as in "vocalization"), not their employment.
[←68] John 10:16 - And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold: I must also bring them, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
[←69] John 10:26 - But you believe not, because you are not of my sheep.
[←70] Owen argues that the act of believing is not what makes a person one of Christ's sheep. If that were so, then they could not be referred to as his sheep prior to their act of believing, as this text does. The conclusion is that they are already his sheep before they believe. And so being one of his sheep is the result of God's election, Owen says, rather than self-selection, as Moore says.
[←71] A plausible but false argument (it sounds good, but it has no validity)
[←72] Actually, according to Moore, to believe is the fruit of Christ's ministration of the gospel. The missing step of logic, which Owen employs, is that Christ ministers the gospel through the Spirit who is given to Christ's sheep as a result of his death. Hence, it is the fruit of his death.
[←73] an all-wise covering
[←74] Camero, Testardus, Amyraldus.
[←75] That is, one without the other would have defeated his purpose. They are inseparable.
[←76] 1Tim. 1:15
[←77] Ezek. 34:16; Matt. 18:11; Lk. 19:10.
[←78] Heb. 2:10
[←79] Some editors assume this is John 10:33, 34. I disagree. If the verse numbers are correct, then
Owen more likely cites Romans 8:33,34 - Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect?
… It is Christ that died, rather, that is risen again, who at the right hand of God makes intercession for us. As Owen said earlier, and repeats below, the purpose of Christ's intercession is to apply the benefits of his death to the elect.
[←80] 1Jn. 4:9 - God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
[←81] See book iv., chap. ii. and chap. iv., where John 3.16, and Rom. 5.8, are very fully considered.
— Ed.
[←82] "His own place" could also be rendered "a separate place for him."
[←83] The logic of their argument is that God's justice is injured by any sin. And, it would seem,
God's love is conditioned on his justice being completely satisfied. His love cannot be exercised unless satisfaction is first made for every sin, of every sinner. Either all sins are satisfied, or no one can be loved and thus saved. If satisfaction is made for everyone, then
Christ died for everyone.
[←84] That is a dubious claim. The universalists do not argue directly that our salvation depends on God's justice being satisfied, but on his love being exercised. They assume a universal rather than a particular satisfaction, because they assume a universal rather than a particular love.
Their assumption is wrong: "Certainly he could have effected our salvation without loving everyone."
[←85] What Owen objects to here, is the attempt to separate God's love from his justice. He is saying that God would never want to love all unless he satisfied his justice for all. The implication, based on what he has already said, is that God does not love all mankind, and therefore Christ did not die for all mankind. "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." Mal. 1:2,3
[←86] Gen. 3:15.
[←87] In other words, according to some universalists, Christ died for all, but only those who meet the condition of not resisting his grace will be saved. The Scriptures say we are given every grace by his death. Therefore, if he died for all, then all have that grace, and all must be saved.
Impetration and application would remain linked, despite this supposed exception by the universalists.
[←88] Jer. 32:40
[←89] Lev. 18:5; Lk. 10:28; Rom. 8:8
[←90] Lev. 18:5
[←91] 2Thes. 3:2
[←92] Tit. 1:1
[←93] Eph. 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.
[←94] Gen. 8, 9
[←95] Isa. 54:2 – it means that the church has grown, its tent has expanded to contain them.
[←96] Mic. 4:2 – that is, the church has spread to many nations, as promised.
[←97] Lk. 2:10
[←98] Rev. 7:9
[←99] 2Cor. 5:19
[←100] 1Jn. 2:2
[←101] Rom. 1:20-21; 1Cor. 2:7-12
[←102] Jn. 12:39,40 Therefore they could not believe
[←103] Eph. 2:8 For you are saved by grace through faith; … it is the gift of God
[←104] Job 23:13
[←105] See Book II, Chap. VI, Sec. II, fifthly, last paragraph: A ball's presence in my hand does not mean that it created my intent to pick it up. Instead, because I intended to pick up a ball, I first ensured one was accessible to me. In the same way, Christ cannot intend in the past to save someone who may or may not believe in him at some point in the future, outside of his control. Nor can someone create an intent in Christ in the past, that was not there before, simply by believing in him in the present. And so, if it was Christ's intention to save me, then he had to ensure that everything I needed to be saved would be present and effectual in me. If faith was needed, he had to ensure I had it, or his intent would fail. It is not my belief that caused Christ's intent, but his intent that caused my belief.
[←106] Rom 5:8-9 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners,
Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.
[←107] John 11:51-52 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.
[←108] Matt. 7:23
[←109] Rom. 9:13
[←110] Rom. 9:18
[←111] Jam. 2:13
[←112] Jude 4
[←113] Rev 5:9 You… have redeemed us to God by Your blood, Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation;
[←114] Enguos (NT:1450)
[←115] Menei (NT:3306)
[←116] 2Cor. 2:16
[←117] Owen's point here is that, if Christ's death brought universal redemption, then God's wrath would no longer abide for anyone. There would have to be some new condemnation, some new sentence of death that comes to them. But Scripture does not describe it that way. The phrase "death to death," Owen says, is referring to the very same "guilt of death" that all of us were under prior to Christ's death on the cross. It remains for these reprobates. Christ's death, instead of freeing them as it does the elect, only brings home more poignantly the guilt of death under which they suffer. Because they despise the gospel, they are not relieved of their guilt.
[←118] Matt 5:25-26 Agree with your adversary quickly … lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, …and you be thrown into prison… You will not get out of there until you pay the last penny.
[←119] This argument may easily be misunderstood. Abraham was not burning in the flames of hell until Christ died for him. Owen's point here is that Christ did not die for the convinced damned, but only for the convinced elect. He was covenantally obliged to die for them as their surety. We often say that God "looked forward" to Christ's sacrifice that redeemed Abraham
(Lk. 16:23). But Owen shortly points out that God set free those in the past whom Christ promised to pay for in due time.
[←120] See Book I, Chap. VIII, Gen. Arg., Moore's argument that Christ died for all but intercedes only for some.
[←121] Acts 15:9 purifying their hearts by faith
[←122] Owen assumes that Paul is the writer of Hebrews – a minority view today.
[←123] I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more will every man teach his neighbor, and his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they shall all know Me, from the least to the greatest, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and remember their sin no more.
[←124] Titus 2:14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.
[←125] Eph 5:25-26 just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her, so that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word
[←126] See Book I, Chap. II, Sec. II, Relaton of End to Means.
[←127] Also Heb. 11:6 – Without faith, it is impossible to please God.
[←128] Heb. 12:2
[←129] That is, it suggests we have free will prior to our salvation. That would essentially deny our corrupted nature, and thus our need for God's free grace. See Rom. 7:15.
[←130] 1Cor 2:14-15 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
[←131] Gal. 5:22; Eph. 5:9
[←132] 1Cor 4:7 For who makes you differ from another, and what do you have that you did not receive?
[←133] Rom 11:7 Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
[←134] Owen has already established a link between faith and holiness, just as James linked faith to works. The promise in these passages is that God shall write his law on our hearts so that we may be holy, and he will put his Spirit in us to enable us to be so. Because faith is part of our sanctification, which is our actual holiness, it must be an inherent promise in these passages, and an implicit component of the covenant.
[←135] Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.
[←136] Mark 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
[←137] Matt 1:21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save
His people from their sins.
[←138] 1Cor 10:11 Now all these things happened to them for examples, and they are written for our admonition, on whom the ends of the world have come.
[←139] They entered Caanan as their place of rest, and we enter the kingdom as our place of rest.
[←140] Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
[←141] Heb 12:22 But you have come to mount Zion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly
Jerusalem
[←142] 1Pet.2:9, You are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation
[←143] Heb 8:8 Behold, the days come, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah – This passage seemingly speaks against Owen's proposition by naming the house of Israel in contradistinction to the house of Judah. However,
Jewish writing is poetic. It repeats phrases not for contrast but for emphasis. Here it combines the two houses that man had separated. And so, "What God has put together…" Matt. 19:6.
[←144] John 1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and said of him, 'Behold an Israelite indeed,'
[←145] The cite in the original text was Heb. 9:10. That was an obvious error. The entirety of both chapters is needed to support his statement, not just verse 10.
[←146] "to give his life a ransom for many."
[←147] "who gave himself a ransom in exchange for all;"
[←148] being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood…
[←149] that through death he might bring to nothing him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.
[←150] having spoiled the principalities and powers, he made a show of them…
[←151] If I cause injury to someone, I incur a debt. I am obligated by the law to make the injured party
"whole" again. I am also obligated to pay a price to the state for my transgression of the law – it is not enough to return the money, or to pay the medical bills. I am liable to punishment as well as restitution. If someone steps forward and offers to pay the damages, then they have paid for my transgressions. And if they take my punishment, then they have paid for me, the transgressor. To redeem is to exchange one thing for another, a price for its object. My offense has given rise to two debts, two objects, which are both paid for by the blood of Christ. And so I am redeemed from both. Thus Owen says that, whether dying for our redemption, or dying for the redemption of our transgressions, it is the same.
[←152] This is the logic: Scripture clearly says that Christ died to redeem us, or to redeem our transgressions. If we are redeemed, then we are freed from the debt of our sin. If we are freed from the debt of our sin, then we are freed from all the misery of our bondage, and from Satan's domain. Thus, if Christ died for all, then all are freed, or else redemption has no meaning. All are not freed, as all agree. Therefore, Christ could not have died to redeem all, and redemption cannot be universal.
[←153] 2Cor. 6:17-18.
[←154] Matt. 5:23
[←155] In verse 11, the KJV translates katallage as atonement instead of reconciliation.
[←156] In other words, Christ's atoning sacrifice reconciles God toward us. It does not reconcile us toward God. By faith, we understand that God's wrath has been averted, and thus we accept the reconciliation that has been attained for us by Christ's death. This in turn is what reconciles us to God and completes or perfects the reconciliation, yielding peace.
[←157] 2Cor. 5:18-20 – But all things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and gave the ministry of reconciliation to us; namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not reckoning their trespasses to them, and committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors on behalf of Christ, as though God were entreating through us: we beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
[←158] together and at the same time.
[←159] 1Pet. 2:24, "Who himself bore our sins…"
[←160] "For I know that my redeemer lives…"
[←161] Lev. 16:10, the scapegoat.
[←162] Owen refers to Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), a man distinguished in legal science. He was a child prodigy, like Owen, and considered the Father of International Law. Grotius was a pioneer in natural rights theory, defining natural law as a perceptive judgement in which things are good or bad by their own nature. This conflicted with Calvinism for two reasons. First, because God was no longer the only source of ethics. Second, because Grotius considered ethics inherently good, and products of the nature of man. These ideas were precursors to some of John Locke's theories.
[←163] Grotius says that in offering his life to pay our debt, Christ offered something different than what we were obligated to pay. If God accepts Christ's sacrifice on our behalf, he may be gracious in doing so, but he is not legally obligated to accept it. In fact, accepting it would be no more gracious than simply pardoning our debt to begin with. Moreover, by accepting
Christ's sacrifice on our behalf, God would be clearing our debt, and so there would be no need to pardon us as well. "Defensio Fidei Catholicæ de Satisfactione Christi, contra F.
Socinum."
[←164] In rejecting that what Christ paid was what we owed, Grotius is asserting that the debt is not cleared.
[←165] Rom. 6:4-8; Col. 2:12-13
[←166] Gal. 3:13
[←167] Col. 2:14
[←168] Grotius was from Holland, an Arminian stronghold in the Netherlands. He tried to work a reconciliation between Arminianism and Calvinism, but failed (naively thinking that theological issues could be settled by political and contractual agreements). His opposition to the Calvinist government led to his arrest and imprisonment. He was later charged with treason and placed under permanent house arrest.
[←169] In other words, while it may be true in the world of men that the right to punish is reserved to the state, such a notion has no meaning when God is the lawgiver or creditor. There is no higher authority like the state to which we may reserve punishment. God's kingdom is an absolute autocracy.
[←170] That is, God has the right to punish, and it exists independently of his status as our creditor or as one holding dominion over us. Thus Grotius' initial proposition of dependency is incorrect.
[←171] Isa. 53:5; Rom. 5:19
[←172] "You are just, Lord – who is, and has been, and will continue being the Holy One – because you judged these things."
[←173] This is a straw man argument which establishes a false dichotomy. Are his definitions of liberality and clemency valid propositions, and if valid, is the supposition that they are mutually exclusive valid? Owen refutes the propositions and the conclusion in one blow, using
Grotius' own words.
[←174] He that did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how will he not also with him freely give us all things? Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifies; who is the one that condemns?
[←175] In Greek mythology, Oedipus solved the unsolvable riddle of the Oracle. The Arminian answer, of course, is that Christ's universal atonement was indeed paid in full, but its application is conditional. Owen already dispensed with that argument in Books I and II, proving that it is not conditional. Therefore it must be limited in scope.
[←176] Calvin, John, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 2, Chap. 16, Christ the Redeemer.
[←177] Aquinas, Thomas, Summa Theologica, Third Part, Question 49, Article 4.
[←178] This is an interesting insight into Owen's strictly literal interpretation of Genesis. The same year, Bishop Ussher published his Annals of the Old Testament (1647) in which he dated creation to October 26, 4004 BC. Owen's argument here is that God is eternal, and he eternally decreed to make the world, but the world did not come into being until a desired point in time.
[←179] 1Pet. 2:24
[←180] The first three were arguments XI, XII, and XIII in chapters V, VI, and VII of Book III.
[←181] That is, what is translated from the Latin as "merit" actually refers to pleasing someone, not earning or obtaining something.
[←182] That is, dealing with the removal or loss of something.
[←183] Eph. 1:3-4 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.
[←184] For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake;
[←185] Socinians were antitrinitarian, denying the distinction of persons in the Godhead. Christ was the Logos, but Socinus denied His pre-existence; He was the Word of God only in being His interpreter. Christ was miraculously begotten as a perfect man, and as the appointed mediator, but He was not God (he was a deified man). He was not conceived of the Holy Spirit, but begotten by Joseph. His death did not bring about our redemption. Adam was free from sin only as a fact (i.e. his nature did not change at the Fall). Socinus denied the doctrine of original sin entirely. There was no hell; instead, the wicked were annihilated.
[←186] The good shepherd gives his life for the sheep. I know my sheep and they know me… I lay down my life for the sheep… I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will hear my voice… you do not believe because you are not from my fold. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me… I give them eternal life. My
Father… has given them to me.
[←187] This is a little confusing. The Arminian view is that all are called, and then some become elect by believing. The reformed view is that only some are elect, and all of them will be called and believe. Whether called now or later, only sheep can come, because only sheep are elect.
Goats, wolves, and dogs (non-elect) cannot become sheep. Owen is rejecting self-election here.
[←188] the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
[←189] to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
[←190] If God is for us, who is against us? He that did not spare his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not also with him freely give us all things? Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? Who is the one that condemns? It is Christ Jesus that died, rather, that was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
[←191] Take heed … to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood.
[←192] That is, we preach to non-elect as well as to elect, because we cannot know which is which until they respond.
[←193] That is, of their fellow believers who were Jews.
[←194] The expected return of Christ during the lifetime of some of his disciples (Matt. 16:28; Mk.
9:1; Lk. 9:27) is here interpreted to be the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70AD, followed by the great diaspora.
[←195] Adjunct: Something attached to or related to something else in a dependent or subordinate position. "The king and his army."
[←196] Synecdoche: A figure of speech in which a part or a component of something is used to refer to the whole ("all hands on deck" for sailors), the whole of something to refer to a part (such as the law meaning a police officer), the specific for the general (such as referring to an assassin as a cutthroat, which is only one way to assassinate), the general for the specific
(such as thief for pickpocket), or the material for the thing which is made from it (referring to a sword as steel).
[←197] For the world as a whole.
[←198] The least thing might have held the hope of Troy, if only it could be held itself.
[←199] The skill of making plausible but misleading arguments.
[←200] Note Owen's dry humor in using this phrase to denote the entire world.
[←201] He does not tithe his cloak, or his land, or his children for example.
[←202] That in everything you are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
[←203] There goes that dry humor again in which "confessed by all" means it ought to be universally confessed, but is certainly not.
[←204] And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD.
For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."
[←205] Rev. 21:4
[←206] According to glory, not according to truth.
[←207] According to appearance, not according to being.
[←208] That is, faith is the instrument required to receive grace. It is not the cause of that grace, nor the condition of salvation.
[←209] As we evade the foolish flaw, we hasten the opposite.
[←210] From Homer's Iliad and the Oddyssey, a Greek myth about Odysseus who must sail between the two: Scylla is a twelve-headed monster snatching unsuspecting travelers from her lair, while Charybdis is a consuming vortex only an arrow-shot away.
[←211] It might be said that if we make this issue a component of the gospel, then it must be believed one way or the other if we are to be justified. But if indeed the doctrine of particular atonement is true, then it would be "senseless and vain" to ask anyone to believe the opposite, for that would be a falsehood; everything in the gospel must be true. Therefore, as important as it is, there are prior essentials of the Gospel to which we must assent before considering this issue of the extent of the atonement, and they are sufficient to justify us without it.
[←212] Acta et Scripta Synodalia Dordracena ministrorum Remonstrantium in fœderato Belgio. 2Cor. xiii. 8. Harderwiici, 1620. This volume (a copy of which is in the Union Theol. Seminary
Library) contains the official acts and dogmatic writings of the Remonstrants in explanation and defense of their five articles against the decisions of the Synod of Dort, including a lengthy exposition of the ninth chapter of Romans and other Scripture passages quoted against them. (Philip Schaff, Creeds, 1.ix.iii.iv).
[←213] In logic, this is a form of deductive reasoning consisting of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion; for example, All humans are mortal (the major premise); I am a human (the minor premise), therefore, I am mortal (the conclusion).
[←214] To put that in logical form, there is a set of passages in which the word "world" refers to all men; there is a separate set of passages in which Christ is said to die for the world; it cannot be concluded that these sets are identical. Hence it proves nothing.
[←215] A latin quote from Horace's The Epistle to the Pisones: "What is so worthy?"
[←216] Owen's argument is that an act of mercy denies a natural affection for the object of his mercy.
Mercy is required so as not to punish the individual for his sin – punishment is the natural inclination, and mercy is the remedy for that inclination.
[←217] Owen's logic here may seem questionable. If God extended mercy to all, then there are none who are damned. And that's his point. It suggests that hell must be empty, and hell clearly is not empty. Therefore God cannot "naturally" extend mercy to all.
[←218] That is, a mere wish or inclination; volition at its lowest level.
[←219] A choice selection; something extraordinary and excellent.
[←220] Strongly esteemed or valued.
[←221] Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertain the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
[←222] i.e., whether there are two groups or not, those who do not believe are not the objects of God's love or they would be saved.
[←223] Actually it's aorist passive subjunctive: "that it might be saved" – only the sovereignty of God makes it "should."
[←224] Jn 4:42 – "…this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world."
[←225] Jn 6:51 – "…the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."
[←226] Jn 6:33 – "For the bread of God is he which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world."
[←227] Heb 2:16 For surely he did not take on him the nature of angels {or lay hold of}, but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
[←228] Tit 3:4 But after that the kindness and love {philanthropia} of God our Saviour toward man appeared, …
[←229] Rom 8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
[←230] 1Cor 4:7 For who makes you to differ from another? and what do you have that you did not receive?
[←231] This is an interesting proposition, and one not very well supported by Scripture. Faith comes by hearing, but not salvation. Salvation comes by grace, and that grace is eternally decreed – it is not triggered or activated by faith but by the will of God. It is not dependent on the action or inaction of men, but on the action of God. This doesn't relieve us of our responsibilities, however.
[←232] Rev 5:9 You are worthy to take the book, and to open its seals: for you were slain, and have redeemed us to God by your blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
[←233] Jn 11:51-52 And this he did not speak of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.
[←234] That is, the error that the Gospel is only for the Jews, and not for Gentiles.
[←235] Rev 5:9; 14:6
[←236] Jn 3:36 - He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that does not believes on the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him.
[←237] 1Jn 2:12-13 I write to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. I write to you, fathers, because you have known him that is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one. I write to you, little children, because you have known the Father.
[←238] Heb 8:12-13 For I will be merciful [NT:2436 hileos, propitious] to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities I will remember no more. In that he says, a new covenant; he has made the first old...
[←239] Lk 3:6
[←240] Distinctive clothing, like a uniform, that identifies the servants of a particular household.
[←241] A figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole (as hand for sailor – "all hands on deck!"), the whole for a part (as the law for police officer), the specific for the general (as cutthroat for assassin), the general for the specific (as thief for pickpocket), or the material for the thing made from it (as steel for sword).
[←242] Col 1:5-6 For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; Which has come to you, as it has in all the world; and brings forth fruit, as it does also in you, since the day you heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:
[←243] Impetration: obtaining by petition or entreaty.
[←244] i.e., Jn 3:16 is not about applying for a general ransom, but applying that ransom specifically to believers.
[←245] Rom 3:25 Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
[←246] Unbelievers, who remain dead in their trespasses and sins, are not consoled.
[←247] That is, all the Pharisees could not have been included in "all" those gone out to him, because they rejected such a baptism. Who then was John the Baptist referring to as the brood of vipers, if not the The point is that not every man, woman, and child in Judea and the Jordan territory went out to him.
[←248] Col 1:5-6 You heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, which has come to you; even as it is also bearing fruit and increasing in all the world, as in you…
[←249] Hence "our sins"
[←250] That is, to other non-Jewish believers – specifically the Gentiles to whom Paul was called to preach.
[←251] John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down out of heaven: if any eats of this bread, he shall live forever: indeed, the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.
[←252] That is, uneducated or unrefined.
[←253] More's assertion is that all men are being reconciled, and elect are men; therefore some are reconciled and some are not. Owen rejects More's premise that Christ reconciled all men but saved only some. Rather, Christ reconciled all the elect without exception, because all men are not elect, and Christ intended to reconcile only the elect.
[←254] Behold, this child is set for the falling and the rising of many in Israel;
[←255] 1Co 15:32
[←256] 1Jn 5:16
[←257] Mt 25:41
[←258] Rev 5:9 - Worthy are you to take the book, and to open its seals: for you were slain, and purchased for God with your blood men of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.
[←259] That is, he returns to it again and again like a dumb waiter that goes in circles.
[←260] He refers to the eminent Scotch divine, Samuel Rutherford, 1600–1661. The work mentioned above was published in 1647, and is entitled, "Christ Dying, and Drawing to Himself; or, a survey of our Saviour in his soul's suffering," etc. The opinions of More are discussed in it from page 375 to 410. — Ed.
[←261] In grammar, an enallage is a substitution of one part of speech for another, either of one gender, number, case, person, tense, mode, or voice of the same word for another. Here it is the number: "all" for "every."
[←262] Mt 13:38
[←263] That is, a required virtue.
[←264] See Book II, Chap. III, Sec. III, Moore's Objections, no. 2.(Rom 5.19).
[←265] 1Cor 15:22; Rom 5:15
[←266] Mt 20:28; 1Tim 2:6.
[←267] Apparently Owen addresses only the first and third of the four parallels before moving on to Chapter V.
[←268] See p. 208
[←269] John 17:6,9 I manifested your name to the men whom you gave me out of the world: yours they were, and you gave them to me; and they have kept your word... 9 I pray for them: I do not pray for the world, but for those whom you have given me; for they are yours:
[←270] 2Th 2:11-12 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
[←271] Owen parenthetically adds here: "I do not know what he means by secretly and invisibly; surely he does not suppose that these things might possibly be made the objects of our senses; and for how it is inexpressible, let Rom. 5:12 along with other passages where all this and more is clearly, plainly, and fully expressed, judge whether it is inexpressible or not." Romans
5:12 – Therefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, also death entered by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for all have sinned.
[←272] Roughly, "Unbind mortal life, its cares are lifted up." - WHG
[←273] To impose oneself or one's ideas on others with undue insistence or without invitation.
[←274] That is, everyone included in the covenant receives the effects of the covenant, which in this case is an inheritance in the kingdom. As our surety under the covenant, the effects or benefits of Christ's righteousness and atonement are, by definition, applied to each and every person whom the covenant covers and whom he represents. Its effects include eternal life, receiving the Holy Spirit, being a child of God, being a co-heir with Christ, and being relieved of all condemnation. To assert that Christ's role as surety applies to all mankind is to assert that all mankind is under the covenant; thus he has either failed to be an adequate surety for those who do not actually receive its benefits, or else all mankind will definitely receive the benefits.
Scripture is clear that not all will receive the benefits – some are "prepared for destruction"
(Rom 9:22). Therefore, either Christ has failed (which is impossible considering who he is), or else the covenant does not extend to all mankind.
[←275] Isa 53:5-6 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
[←276] Owen is pointing out that there is a distinction made between the elect and the non-elect who oppose them. Rom 8:33-34 Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
[←277] The justice of God requires satisfaction from everyone. The elect have the complete satisfaction of Christ. Reprobates have no surety, and must therefore make full satisfaction themselves, to the last penny, or be eternally condemned.
[←278] Eph 5:2 And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.
[←279] To weaken or destroy
[←280] that he died for reprobates and those who perish
[←281] Owen misses the simpler response, which involves the definition of the word "destroy."
Apollumi also means to corrupt or render useless, or to lose, without any inference of the loss of salvation being required. We often lose weaker brethren out of the church over minor issues, because they will not be reconciled, and will not permit others the freedom Christ allows. And so they walk away from the church. But to conclude that they have fallen out of the hand of Christ is a stretch.
[←282] This argument is a bit obtuse and double-headed. Owen is suggesting that the visible Church is comprised of wheat and tares, elect and non-elect. It may well be that those in the Church whom we "destroy" by the way we walk, were never elect to begin with, despite their aspirations and profession. But even if we grant that all in the visible Church are saved, the Scripture is clear that only those in the Church were to be redeemed by Christ. Not everyone is in the Church; therefore Christ did not die for all.
[←283] To stretch a piece of hot metal into wire by drawing it through a hole in a plate of steel; and so it means to stretch something by craft or force, or to stretch and twist something out to great length until it become tenuous and weak.
[←284] Rev 14:4b – These were redeemed [bought] from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. Also John 10:28 "And I give to them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."
[←285] Roughly: "by obliging, or else by bringing ruin" - WHG
[←286] Possibly Heb. 4:5,6 "And again in this passage he said, 'They shall not enter my rest.' Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience." It is more likely referring to Heb 6:4,5 which Owen refers to in his third point, "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, and then fall away…"
[←287] Owen states parenthetically here, "(he is not giving life to the thing, but only showing the connection between apostasy and condemnation, thereby stirring up all the saints to "take heed lest there should be in any of them an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God)"
Heb 3:12.
[←288] Roughly, "for they place it where there is no place for it" – the Latin suppositio means to place or position under.
[←289] "There is the trouble, there is the toil" – In the Aeneid, Homer describes the easy descent into Hell, but the hard return.
[←290] Prov 22:20 Have not I written to you excellent things in counsels and knowledge, 21 That I might make you know the certainty of the words of truth; that you might answer the words of truth to those that send to you?
[←291] Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
[←292] 2Pet 1:19-20 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; to which you do well that you take heed, as to a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
[←293] Owen has reduced all those chapters to these three lines which have no foundation and cannot support More's conclusion. Whether Owen's rancor and dismissive attitude are justified cannot be determined from the little we have to go by here.
[←294] Jn 20:31 But these are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name.
[←295] Acts 26:27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe.
[←296] Roughly - O how great is the understanding! Spoken sarcastically, of course, as the parting shot indicates.
[←297] The phrase "once for all" is the Greek word (NT:2178 ephapaz); it means "as against once".
The context concerns the offering of the temple priest who had to repeat his sacrificial offering on behalf of the people each week. This is compared to Christ, our Great High Priest, who offered one final sacrifice "as against all" those repeated sacrifices of the temple priest. It carries with it no inference of who it was done for – the single act has been done in lieu of "all" the others.
[←298] I worded it "every single one" to convey the idea that there are no exceptions. Owen himself states that Christ died for all men where "all" means some of all sorts of men, and so it might otherwise be confusing as to the distinction he makes here.
[←299] Apart from God's grace and His calling, all these propositions would remain true. What is false, Owen says, is extrapolating either universal salvation or universal condemnation from men's universal depravity.
[←300] See notes on pp. 81 and 175 concerning sophistry and syllogism.
[←301] Roughly, "Since in this the people are willing to be deceived by the deceiver."
[←302] Roughly, "This Ithacus desired, and the great trade of Atridae." This is another quote from Virgil's Aeneid, Book II. It is a caustic reference to someone's longing for prestige, but lacking the requisite means to attain it.
[←303] Rom 2:12-16 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law (for it is not the hearers of the law who are just before God, but the doers of the law who shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, not having the law, are a law to themselves: which shows the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another;) in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
[←304] Loosely: the question is, for others, a promise (or wager) for a bribe.
[←305] Ac 5:20 – Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.
[←306] Loosely, "The very same is what draws folly to the church."
[←307] Christ's atonement is infinite in value, and thus it is sufficient to redeem the whole world, every man, woman, and child in all generations. However, it is efficient (applicable and effective) only for the elect who have gained an interest and a right to it through God's decree.
Thus, not knowing who is elect, the Church universally proclaims (promiscuously proposes) the Gospel.
[←308] Phil 2:7-11 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in form as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross. For which God has also highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
[←309] Rom 9:19
[←310] Jn 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one who sees the Son, and believes on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
[←311] Back to Virgil's Aeneid, this reads loosely, "Even if so excellent to hold, the hope which Troy held was unimportant." That is, Troy would fall to its destruction regardless of its hopes and expectations in the matter.
[←312] Loosely, "one hand rubs the other."
[←313] Loosely, "mules scratch each other."
[←314] Arminians assert there is a universal proclamation of God's purpose of mercy towards all – a universal vocation or calling. This is an invitation to receive pardon and salvation. It is accompanied, they say, by a universal sufficient grace — this is God's gracious assistance that is actually and universally bestowed. It is sufficient to enable all men, if they choose, to obtain salvation. Calvinists admit that pardon and salvation are to be proclaimed to all, but this does not indicate God's intent to save all men, nor does it indicate that His grace and divine help, sufficient to produce faith and regeneration, are given to all men.
[←315] Actually, it's "from the side to the angle". It indicates an impossible conclusion since the geometric axiom requires two sides and an angle to determine a triangle. Owen relates it to weaving, in which the yarn woven across the warp with a shuttle is rolled onto the back beam; and so it never goes from the beam to the shuttle. He's saying that this argument is back-tofront.
[←316] Jn 3:18-19 He that believes on him is not condemned: but he that does nto believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
[←317] Jn 8:24 I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins: for if you do not believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins.
[←318] Jn 12:48 He that rejects me, and does not receive my words, has one that judges him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
[←319] Jn 15:22, 24 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin. 24 If I had not done among them the works which no other man did, they would not have had sin: but now they have both seen and hated both me and my
Father.
[←320] Loosely, "But who is this according to us?"
[←321] Loosely, "substitute with zealous service"
[←322] Jn 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send him to you.
[←323] Rev 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
[←324] 1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things write I to you, so that you do not sin. And if any man sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
[←325] To cause humiliation or disgrace to by making malicious and false statements; to malign.
[←326] Having overcome Satan, his power of death is no longer a threat to the saints. "Where O death is your sting?" 1Co 15:55
[←327] Ezek 33:2-4 Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say to them, When I bring the sword upon a land, and the people of the land take a man from among them, and set him for their watchman, if, when he sees the sword come upon the land, he blows the trumpet, and warns the people, then whoever hears the sound of the trumpet, and does not take warning, and if the sword comes and takes him away, his blood shall be upon his own head.
[←328] Ezek 33:18 When the righteous turns from his righteousness, and commits iniquity, he shall even die in it.
[←329] Latin: the issue or question before us
[←330] Jn 17:19-20 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither do I pray for these alone, but for those also which shall believe on me through their word;
[←331] Eph 1:3-4 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: 4 According as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
[←332] Rev 5:9-10 And they sung a new song, saying, You are worthy to take the book, and to open its seals: for you were slain, and have redeemed us to God by your blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 10 And have made us kings and priests to our God: and we shall reign on the earth.
[←333] That is, precisely or exactly.
[←334] That is, the comparison does not concern the scope of those affected, but the consequence to those affected.
[←335] Acts 16:6-7 Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden by the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, 7 after they had come to Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit did not allow them.
[←336] 1Jn 5:16 If any man sees his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall pray, and God shall give him life – for those who do not sin unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
[←337] Jn 17:9 I pray for them: I do not pray for the world, but for those whom you have given me; for they are yours.
[←338] Jer 29:7 And seek the peace of the city to which I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray to the LORD for it: for in its peace you shall have peace.
[←339] Acts 8:22,24 Repent therefore of this wickedness, and pray to God, that perhaps the thought of your heart may be forgiven. 24 Then Simon answered, and said, You pray to the Lord for me, that none of these things which you have spoken come upon me. [Peter and John do not pray for Simon the Magician, but it is unclear how that applies to Owen's proposition. Perhaps
Mt 5:44 is a better support: But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you; or Lk 6:28: bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.].
[←340] Tit 2:11,13 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, …13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus
Christ;
[←341] That is, a universal love held in common toward all mankind, which fails to certainly save all mankind.
[←342] Tit 3:4-5, 7 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, 5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; … 7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
[←343] Act 13:47-48 47 For so has the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set you to be a light of the Gentiles, that you should be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. 48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
[←344] Actually, that is not the argument as Owen's second answer shows. The argument is that, if men are condemned for refusing the light, then the light must have been presented to them.
Owen goes on to say that all men have not been presented with the light, and they are not condemned for refusing it. They stand condemned already and have not been relieved of it (Jn
3:18-19).
[←345] John Gill explains 'winked at' this way: "the sense is, he despised this, and them for it, and was displeased and angry with them; and as an evidence of such contempt and indignation, he overlooked them, and took no notice of them, and gave them no revelation to direct them, nor prophets to instruct them, and left them to their stupidity and ignorance."
[←346] "Being from Adam, they have fallen into darkness, hardness, and have lost their souls; the sentence of death has been passed on them. How could these things be if no life had been attained by Jesus Christ, no atonement made, no restoration made of their souls, nor means procured and used so that they might be saved? God is no hard master, to gather where he has not sown."
[←347] That is, there will come a limit to the blessings which rain down upon the just and the unjust alike, but no limit to the blessings which flow from the blood of Christ. Therefore it cannot be that all men should be covered by the blood of Christ and yet some not receive its final blessings of redemption and eternal salvation.
[←348] That is, the blessing of Christ's blood has been certainly proclaimed to some, and yet they despised it. Thus, either it cannot be effective to restore all men, or else it is limited in its blessings. It is not limited; therefore all men are not restored by it.
[←349] Isaiah also cries concerning Israel, "Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved…"
[←350] Ps 147:19-20 He shows his word to Jacob, his statutes and his judgments to Israel. 20 He has not dealt so with any other nation: and as for his judgments, other nations have not known them. Praise the LORD.
[←351] This distinguishes general revelation, which all men have, from special revelation which is contained in the Gospel.
[←352] In other words, the fact that God pleads with his people about such things does not indicate what his purpose is in Christ. Even if he were to work these things in their hearts, it would not reveal anything about redemption through the blood of Christ. So they cannot be motivated by their rejection of Christ, which is what the proof asserts is the cause of their "perishing of themselves".
[←353] See Book IV, Chapter VI, III. The purpose of Christ's death and exaltation is to be Lord of all..
[←354] That is, Christ's death was incurred to pay the penalty for our sins, not to gain the right to judge all men.
[←355] "Judging men according to the gospel" means applying the benefits of the gospel to its intended recipients. Owen understands that Christ judges all men according to the law; but some are savingly judged according to the mercy of the gospel.
[←356] Jude 3-5 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write to you of the common salvation, it was necessary for me to write to you, and exhort you, that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints. 4 For certain men have crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 5 I will therefore remind you, though you once knew this, how the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.
[←357] Roughly, a commonality of the whole that comes from its lesser parts – i.e. all things are shared in common to some extent.
[←358] Jn 3:36 He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that does not believe the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him.
[←359] Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
[←360] The last clauses of this sentence are obscure. In the edition by the Rev. Adam Gib, 1755 it is proposed to render them, "which is not revealed to the object of justification, or in the way by which a sinner may be justified." If we were at liberty to change the "nor" into "but," a meaning sufficiently intelligible would be obtained, without any violent alteration of the text, and quite in harmony with the scope of the reasoning. Ed. It is reassuring to know that the 1853 editor, Wm Goold, struggled as much as I have with the meaning of the text; yet I disagree with Goold that "nor" should be "but." Owen's entire point is that we don't need to know God's purpose, nor his intent, nor the specific objects of justification (those for whom he died), in order to be justified ourselves. This conclusion was developed at length in Book IV,
Chap 1, Sections 1 to 3.
[←361] That is, even those who disagree with Owen (those prejudiced to his cause) would grant the argument as stated.
[←362] Probably Isa 11:10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
[←363] Rom 8:34 Who is he that condemns? It is Christ that died, yes rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
[←364] Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
[←365] Mt 11:28 Come to me, all you that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
[←366] Isa 55:1 Ho, every one that thirsts, come to the waters; and he that has no money: come, buy, and eat; yes, come! buy wine and milk without money and without price.
[←367] This is his commandment: that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he commanded.
[←368] Ac 20:21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
[←369] Eph 5:2 Walk in love, as Christ also loved us, and gave himself for us – an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor.
[←370] Mk 16:16 He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that does not believe shall be damned.
[←371] Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
[←372] Rom 5:8 But God commends his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
[←373] Socinians reject the cross as anything but an example to us, and so it is our own obedience that saves us: a doctrine of works.
[←374] Rom 9:11-13 (For the children not yet being born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 12
It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13 As it is written, Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.
[←375] Eph 1:4-5 According as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
[←376] Rom 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to his purpose.
[←377] Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?
[←378] Eph 5:25-26 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
[←379] Tit 1:15 To the pure all things are pure: but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
[←380] 2Th 3:2
[←381] Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written,
The just shall live by faith.
[←382] Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesus Christ unto all and upon all those who believe:
[←383] Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus
Christ.
[←384] Rev 5:9 You are worthy to take the book, and to open its seals: for you were slain, and have redeemed us to God by your blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
[←385] Not the qualifying conditions that must be met to be joined to the covenant, but the benefits of the covenant; otherwise they could not be 'worked' or 'wrought' in the federates.
[←386] Those joined to the covenant by God's eternal decree – the beneficiaries of Christ's atonement; the elect ('selective grace').
[←387] The phrase 'by virtue of' does not refer to what causes the denial, but what works the benefits in the 'federates'; it is the promise of God that ensures they will receive the benefits so that the covenantal conditions of grace will be worked in them.
[←388] Deportment: conduct or behavior.
[←389] solid; same material throughout, unalloyed; not hollow; dense; unbroken or whole;
[←390] Roughly, with regard to yourself, give generously, servant.
[←391] As opposed to God making the distinction between us.
[←392] In the sense of making bold assertions and sweeping claims, not in the sense of prospering.
[←393] That is, the figment that gives rise to Free-Will or Universal Grace.
[←394] Heb 6:17-18 In which God, willing more abundantly to show to the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: 18 that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:
[←395] Isa 40:1-2 Comfort you, comfort my people, says your God. 2 Speak comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry to her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she has received from the LORD'S hand double for all her sins.
[←396] Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
[←397] Jer 23:14 I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem a horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none returns from his wickedness:
[←398] Ezek 13:10 Because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter:
[←399] To which an Arminian would say, "Amen!" Owen does not clearly "prove" here that consolation proceeds from the distinction between elect and reprobate. He simply says it as a proposition. He declares his reasoning immediately below in (iii) and in his answer to the next
Arminian proposition.
[←400] Impetration: obtaining something by petition or beseeching. Arminians insist that Christ may petition the Father to redeem all men based on his atonement, but the Father's willingness to actually redeem anyone, is conditionally restricted to those who, having heard the gospel, believe it of their own free will. Thus Christ only made provision for men's salvation through his death.
[←401] Ps 49:5 – the iniquity of my adversaries or "supplanters" who surround me.
[←402] Ps 38:3
[←403] Loosely, "And even be myself great Apollo." Phoebus Apollo occupied the seat of the Oracle at Delphi. He was the author of all those ambiguous oracles of old, given in response to questions concerning personal destiny. And he is mentioned, again, in Virgil's Aeneid. It basically means "I am the anwer to my own riddle, the determiner of my own destiny."
[←404] Oblation: an act of offering, in this case, Christ's atoning sacrifice is offered. His intercession for us flows from that oblation.
[←405] Romans 8:32-34 32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? 33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifies. 34 Who is he that condemns? It is Christ that died, yes rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.
[←406] 1John 2:1-2 My little children, these things I write to you, that you do not sin. And if any man sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
[←407] 1Cor 15:14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith is also in vain.
[←408] The phrase is a contraction of "Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego" "Let the Jew Apella believe it; not I". The phrase means, roughly, tell it to someone else, not me. It comes from Horace's
Satires, Book 1, Satire 5.
[←409] The syllogism is this: God's word says it; the Spirit testifies to it; therefore Christ died for me.
[←410] 1Jn 5:6 now these three testify: the water, blood, and Spirit. Christ's life is in his Word – his body and blood which we eat and drink (Jn 6:53); the Spirit conveys that Word to our hearts, testifying of Christ and reminding us of all he said (Jn 14:26; 15:26).
[←411] Mt 1: 21 And she shall bring forth a son, and you shall call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.
[←412] Rom 16:27
[←413] I know your works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but you are rich)
[←414] These seven sermons on the cardinal works of Christ are the production of Arnoldus
Carnotensis, abbot of the Benedictine monastery of Bonneval, in the diocese of Chartres. He flourished about the middle of the twelfth century. Several of his practical treatises were for a time ascribed to Cyprian. — Ed.
[←415] This was a council held at Valence in a.d. 855, and convened from the three provinces of Lyons, Vienne, and Arles. Remigius presided, five canons by a council in a.d. 853, at Chiersey, were condemned, and the cause of Godeschalcus, who had raised the controversy, was warmly supported. The canon quoted above is designed to contradict the fourth canon of the council at Chiersey, according to which "there never was, is, or will be a man for whom Christ has not died." — Ed.
[←416] Something which is out of order
[←417] Greek paroramata indicates a logical inconsistency, an error in thought.
[←418] A qualm: an uneasy feeling arising from the conscience or our principles that tends to hinder action.
[←419] Owen uses this phrase in Chapter 12 of "A Display of Arminianism". It refers to the wooden idol of Dagon, carved from the trunk of a tree, which Origen described as "a fig-tree log, an unprofitable piece of wood." - WHG
[←420] Observations and solutions – analytic technique of the Schoolmen.
[←421] That is, universal salvation apart from any justification by Christ or righteousness by men.
[←422] Helen of Troy, the beauty whose abduction by Paris led to the Trojan War. She was the sinfully sought-after prize.
[←423] In Virgil's Aeneid, the pretended Greek traitor, Sinon, gave a deceptive speech which led the Trojans to leave the wooden Greek Horse alone with a troop of Greek warriors inside, including Odysseus. Sinon let the Greek warriors out and opened the gates; this led to the Fall of Troy; so the phrase "Sinonian arts" refers to Sinon's craftiness
[←424] "The Family of Love" – Familists were an Antinomian/Perfectionist sect founded in Holland about 1540 by Hendrik Niclaes. They spread to England about 1580. They taught that true believers live in a natural state of Grace without Sin. The Laws of Moses and Man no longer applied to those who attainted a state of perfection. Critics of these Antinomians viewed them as immoral, lacking in religious virtue, and unbiblical. "The Familist believed that true enlightenment was only possible by possessing the true inner dwelling spirit of God revealing himself. The Spirit of God dwelling in a true Believer made all things possible. A state of perfection with God was possible here on earth by living your life as Christ. The life of Christ was the model for perfection, not His death and resurrection. Only those who followed the Familists' being of love would receive true salvation according to 'N.H.'", their founder. – http://www.exlibris.org/nonconform/engdis/familists.html
[←425] "And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement."
[←426] And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us, and has given himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor.
[←427] This is a caustic reference to the Roman Catholic episcopal authority to issue an official license to publish a book.
[←428] Latin: do what has already been done.
[←429] All things in appearance change, the appearances of Christians themselves??
[←430] Eph 6:23